NEW  VIEWPOINTS 
IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


THE    MACMILLAN    COMPANY 

IISW  YORK    •    BOSTON   •    CHICAGO    •    DALLAS 
ATLANTA    •    SAN  FRANCISCO 

MACMILLAN  &  CO.,  LIMITED 

LONDON    •    BOMBAY    •    CALCUTTA 
MELBOURNE 

THE  MACMILLAN  CO.  OP  CANADA,  Lm. 
TORONTO 


NEW  VIEWPOINTS 
IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


BY 
ARTHUR  MEIER  SCHLESINGER 

PROFESSOR  OF  HISTORY  IN  THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  IOWA 


A  comprehension  of  the  United  States  of  to-day,  an 
understanding  of  the  rise  and  progress  of  the  forces 
which  have  made  it  what  it  is,  demands  that  we  should 
rework  our  history  from  the  new  points  of  view  af 
forded  by  the  present. 

FREDERICK  JACKSON  TURNER: 

Presidential   Address 


gorfc 
THE  MACMILLAN  COMPANY 

1922 


All  rights  reserved 

H 


1  "f 


PRINTED  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA 


A 


COPYRIGHT,   1922, 
BY  THE  MACMILLAN  COMPANY. 

Set  up  and  electrotyped.     Published,  April,  1922. 


Press  of 

J.  J.  Little  &  Ives  Company 
New  York,  U.  S.  A. 


TO 

O.  S.  S. 
K.  B.  S. 
B.  S. 
H.  N.  S. 

3Jn  ifflemoriam 


FOREWORD 

Most  adult  Americans  of  today  gained  their  knowledge  of 
American  history  before  the  present  generation  of  historians 
had  made  perceptible  progress  in  their  epoch-making  work 
of  reconstructing  the  story  of  our  past  in  ihe  light  of  their 
new  studies  and  investigations.  Signs  of  a  renaissance  of 
American  historical  writing  began  to  be  evident  as  early  as 
the  decade  of  the  eighties  of  the  last  century.  The  new 
interest  in  historical  and  social  phenomena  was  shown,  for 
instance,  in  the  founding  of  the  American  Historical  Asso 
ciation,  the  American  Economic  Association,  the  American 
Statistical  Association  and  the  American  Academy  of  Po 
litical  and  Social  Science  during  that  decade,  followed  shortly 
after  by  the  formation  of  the  American  Political  Science 
Association,  the  American  Sociological  Society  and  the 
American  Society  of  International  Law.  American  history, 
which  had  formerly  been  envisaged  as  a  record  of  arid  po 
litical  and  constitutional  development,  began  to  be  enriched 
by  the  new  conceptions  and  fresh  points  of  view  afforded  by 
the  scientific  study  of  economics,  sociology  and  politics. 
Influences  from  abroad  also  played  their  part,  particularly 
the  notable  work  of  John  Richard  Green,  A  Short  History 
of  the  English  People  (1874),  with  its  revisions  and  enlarge 
ments.  Quickened  by  these  new  impulses,  historians  began 
to  view  the  past  of  America  with  broadened  vision  and  to 
attain  the  power  of  seeing  familiar  facts  in  new  relation 
ships. 

The  change  did  not  take  place  overnight.  Historical  stu 
dents  in  the  nineties  made  important  contributions  toward 

vii 


viii  FOREWORD 

the  new  history;  but  it  was  not  until  the  opening  years  of 
the  present  century  that  the  real  transformation  occurred. 
All  historical  study  and  writing  since  then  have  been  strongly 
colored  by  the  new  interests,  viewpoints  and  sympathies. 

Unfortunately,  the  product  of  the  new  school  of  American 
historians  has,  in  very  large  part,  been  buried  in  the  files  of 
historical  society  journals,  in  the  learned  publications  of  the 
universities  and  in  monographs  privately  printed  at  the  ex 
pense  of  the  authors.  The  new  history  was  being  written  by 
historians  for  historians  rather  than  for  laymen;  and  the 
public  generally  has  remained  oblivious  of  the  great  revolu 
tion  in  our  knowledge  of  American  history  wrought  by  the 
research  specialists.  Even  the  school  textbooks  have  not 
until  a  comparatively  recent  time  been  affected  by  the  djs- 
coveries  of  the  specialists ;  and  too  often  the  newer  type  of 
textbook  has  suffered  at  the  hands  of  teachers  who,  though 
familiar  with  the  new  facts  and  emphases  as  set  forth  in  the 
textbook,  have  no  acquaintance  with  the  general  point  of 
view  which  gives  to  these  new  facts  their  tremendous 
significance. 

The  object  of  the  present  work  is  to  bring  together  and 
summarize,  in  non-technical  language,  some  of  the  results 
of  the  researches  of  the  present  era  of  historical  study  and 
to  show  their  importance  to  a  proper  understanding  of 
American  history.  It  seems  unnecessary  to  say  that  the 
interest  aroused  by  the  World  War  in  Americanization  work 
makes  it  important  that  all  citizens  of  the  republic  should 
learn  what  the  historians  have  to  say  about  the  past  of  their 
country:  Americanization  must  begin  at  home.  History 
teachers  in  the  public  schools  may  also  find  in  this  volume  a 
short  cut  to  a  rather  extensive  literature  inaccessible  to  most 
of  them.  It  is  the  further  hope  of  the  author  that  graduate 
students  venturing  forth  into  the  field  of  American  history 
for  the  first  time  may  find  this  volume  useful  in  suggesting 


FOREWORD  ix 

the  special  interests  of  the  present  generation  of  historians 
and  some  of  the  tendencies  that  seem  likely  to  guide  his 
torical  research  for  some  years  to  come.  It  has  not  been  my 
primary  purpose  to  celebrate  the  names  of  the  men  and 
women  who  have  cleared  the  new  trails;  but  an  effort  has 
been  made  in  the  notes  at  the  end  of  each  chapter  to  render 
due  acknowledgment. 

The  title  of  this  volume  is,  in  a  sense,  a  misnomer  since 
the  viewpoints  presented  are  not  new  to  workers  in  the  his 
tory  field  nor  are  all  the  new  viewpoints  set  forth.  In  ex 
planation  of  the  omissions,  the  author  can  only  plead  his 
feeling  that  the  points  of  view  omitted  are  not  as  essential 
as  those  that  have  been  included  or  else  that  the  viewpoint 
in  question  has  not  yet  been  sufficiently  worked  out  or  defined 
to  merit  inclusion  at  this  time.  In  the  latter  category  fall 
two  approaches  to  American  history  which  are  certain  to 
receive  more  careful  attention  in  the  future,  that  of  religious 
and  sectarian  influences  in  American  development,  and  the 
point  of  view  represented  by  the  psychoanalysts.  Some  of 
the  groundwork  upon  which  a  religious  interpretation  of 
American  history  might  be  based  has  already  been  laid  by 
special  students  of  American  church  history;  and  the  pos 
sibilities  of  the  psychological  approach  are  suggested,  for 
example,  by  the  series  of  articles  on  "The  American  Mind", 
written  by  Harvey  O'Higgins  and  Edward  H.  Reede  in 
McClure's,  vol.  53  (1921),  Nos.  3,  4,  6  and  7.  It  should  be 
added  that  the  significant  point  of  view  presented  by  Her 
bert  Eugene  Bolton  and  Thomas  Maitland  Marshall  in  their 
book,  The  Colonisation  of  North  America  1492-1783  (New 
York,  1920),  is  not  treated  here  for  the  reason  that  the 
plan  of  the  present  volume  embraces  only  such  influences 
and  conditions  as  contributed  vitally  to  the  national  de 
velopment  of  the  United  States. 

A  work  of  this  kind  can  hardly  hope  to  be  free  of  error, 


x  FOREWORD 

although  I  believe  that  no  errors  have  crept  in  that  would 
invalidate  the  general  conclusions  reached.  Nor  can  I  hope 
that  I  have  been  completely  successful  in  eliminating  the 
personal  equation.  Every  teacher  of  history  evolves  a  phi 
losophy  of  history  which  will  find  expression  in  spite  of  all 
efforts  at  repression ;  and  this  is  particularly  true  when  the 
subject  matter  dealt  with  is  controversial  in  character.  Be 
cause  of  the  scheme  of  treatment  a  certain  amount  of  repeti 
tion  in  dealing  with  special  incidents  and  movements  has 
been  rendered  necessary.  In  putting  my  material  into 
printed  form  I  owe  much  to  the  interest  and  encouragement 
of  certain  secondary  school  teachers  who  heard  much  of  the 
material  in  lecture  form  in  summer  school  classes  in  the  Ohio 
State  University  and  the  University  of  Iowa  in  1919  and 
1920.  A  number  of  my  friends  have  helpfully  read  portions 
of  the  completed  manuscript.  In  particular  I  am  indebted 
to  Professor  F.  W.  Coker  and  Dr.  Carl  Wittke  of  the  Ohio 
State  University.  To  my  wife  Elizabeth  Bancroft  I  am  obli 
gated  for  assistance  rendered  at  every  stage  of  the  prepara 
tion  of  the  manuscript.  Chapters  I,  VII  and  XI  appeared 
originally  in  somewhat  altered  form  in  the  American  Journal 
of  Sociology,  the  Political  Science  Quarterly  and  the  His 
torical  Outlook;  and  for  permission  to  use  them  again  I  am 
indebted  to  the  editors  of  those  journals. 

A.  M.  S. 


CONTENTS 

PAGE 

FOREWORD vii 

CHAPTER 

*  I    THE  INFLUENCE  OF  IMMIGRATION  ON  AMERI 
CAN  HISTORY i 

II     GEOGRAPHIC  FACTORS  IN  AMERICAN  DEVELOP 
MENT    .....       23 

4fIII     ECONOMIC   INFLUENCES    IN   AMERICAN    HIS 
TORY 47 

IV    THE  DECLINE  OF  ARISTOCRACY  IN  AMERICA  .       72 

V    RADICALISM   AND   CONSERVATISM   IN   AMERI 
CAN    HISTORY 103 

VI     THE  ROLE  OF  WOMEN  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY     126 
VII     THE  AMERICAN   REVOLUTION    .     .     .     .     , .   160 

VIII     ECONOMIC  ASPECTS   OF  THE  MOVEMENT    FOR 

THE  CONSTITUTION 184 

IX    THE   SIGNIFICANCE  OF  JACKSONIAN   DEMOC 
RACY 200 

X    THE  STATE  RIGHTS  FETISH 220 

j*  XI     THE  FOUNDATIONS  OF  THE  MODERN  ERA  .     .  245 

XII    THE  RIDDLE  OF  THE  PARTIES 266 

INDEX 289 


NEW  VIEWPOINTS 
IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


C 


ALIFORNIA 


NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN 
AMERICAN  HISTORY 

CHAPTER  I 

THE    INFLUENCE    OF    IMMIGRATION    ON    AMERICAN    HISTORY 

The  New  World  was  discovered  by  a  man  who  was 
trying  his  utmost  to  find  an  older  world  than  the  one  from 
which  he  had  sailed.  If  Columbus  had  known  that  he  had 
failed  to  reach  the  fabled  Orient,  he  would  have  died  a 
bitterly  disillusioned  man.  Yet,  in  the  judgment  of  his 
tory,  the  measure  of  his  greatness  is  to  be  found  in  the  fact 
that  he  committed  this  cardinal  blunder,  for  thereby  he  and 
the  later  explorers  opened  up  to  the  crowded  populations  of 
Europe  a  means  of  escape  from  poverty  and  oppression 
for  many  centuries  to  come.  The  ratio  between  man  and 
land  became  changed  for  the  whole  civilized  world,  and 
there  opened  up  before  humanity  unsuspected  opportunities 
for  development  and  progress.  On  account  of  political  dis 
turbances  in  Europe  and  the  difficulties  of  ocean  travel,  the 
full  possibilities  of  this  epochal  change  were  only  gradually 
developed;  and  the  effects  were  thus  distributed  through 
the  last  four  centuries  of  world-history.  But  the  event  itself 
stands  forth  as  one  of  the  tremendous  facts  of  history.  So 
far  as  the  human  mind  can  foresee,  nothing  of  a  similar 
nature  can  ever  happen  again. 

The  great    Volkerwanderungen,   set  in   motion    by    the 


VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

opening  up  of  the  Western  Hemisphere,  have  been  essen 
tially  unlike  any  earlier  migrations  in  history,  and  in  com 
parison  with  them  most  of  the  earlier  movements  of  popula 
tion  were  numerically  insignificant.  In  a  large  sense,  all 
American  history  has  been  the  product  of  these  migratory 
movements  from  the  Old  World.  Since  the  red-skinned 
savage  has  never  been  a  potent  factor  in  American  develop 
ment,  the  whole  history  of  the  United  States  and,  to  a  lesser 
degree,  of  the  two  Americas  is,  at  bottom,  the  story  of  the 
successive  waves  of  immigration  and  of  the  adaptation  of 
the  newcomers  and  their  descendants  to  the  new  surround 
ings  offered  by  the  Western  Hemisphere.  Thus  the  two 
grand  themes  of  American  history  are,  properly,  the  influ 
ence  of  immigration  upon  American  life  and  institutions, 
and  the  influence  of  the  American  environment,  especially 
the  frontier  in  the  early  days  and  the  industrial  integration 
of  more  recent  times,  upon  the  ever-changing  composite 
population. 


Columbus's  first  voyage  of  discovery  was  a  strange  fore 
shadowing  of  the  later  history  of  the  American  people,  for, 
in  a  very  real  sense,  his  voyage  may  be  considered  an  inter 
national  enterprise.  Acting  under  the  authority  of  Spain, 
this  Italian  sailed  with  a  crew  consisting  of  Spaniards,  one 
Irishman,  an  Englishman,  and  an  Israelite.  These  national 
ities  were  later  to  enter  fully  into  the  rich  heritage  which  this 
voyage  made  possible  to  the  world.  In  the  next  two  centuries 
the  nations  of  Europe,  large  and  small,  sought  to  stake  out 
colonial  claims  in  America,  not  with  entire  success  from 
an  imperialistic  point  of  view,  but  with  the  result  that 
cultural  foundations  were  laid  whose  influence  may  still  be 
traced  in  the  legal  systems,  customs,  and  institutions  of 
many  parts  of  the  United  States  today.  A  familiar  illus- 


THE  INFLUENCE  OF  IMMIGRATION  3 

tration  is  afforded  in  the  case  of  Louisiana,  where  the  con 
tinental   civil   law,    instead    of    the   English    common    law, 
governs  domestic  relations  and  transfers  of  property  as  aN 
reminder  of  the  days  when  the  French  and  the  Spanish 
owned  the  land. 

Contrary  to  a  widespread  belief,  even  the  people  of  the 
thirteen  English  colonies  were  a  mixture  of  ethnic  breeds. 
Indeed,  these  colonies  formed  the  most  cosmopolitan  area 
in  the  world  at  the  time.  This  was  due,  in  part,  to  the 
English  conquest  of  colonies  planted  by  rival  European 
powers  along  the  Atlantic  Coast,  but  was  the  result  more 
largely  of  abundant  immigration  from  various  parts  of  the 
world  after  the  original  settlements  had  been  well  estab 
lished.  A  Colonial  Dame  or  a  Daughter  of  the  American 
Revolution  might  conceivably  have  nothing  but  pure 
Hebrew  blood  or  French  or  German  blood  in  her  veins. 
During  the  first  century  of  English  colonization,  the  seven 
teenth,  the  English  race  was  the  main  contributor  to  the 
population,  the  Dutch  and  French  Huguenot  contributions 
being  less  important.  These  racial  elements  occupied  the 
choice  lands  near  the  coast,  and  thus  compelled  the  stream 
of  immigration  of  the  eighteenth  century  to  pour  into  the 
interior,  a  significant  development  in  view  of  the  different 
character  and  great  numbers  of  these  later  settlers. 

While  the  religious  motive  has  properly  been  stressed  in 
the  history  of  colonization,  it  should  not  be  overlooked  that 
the  economic  urge,  operating  independently  or  as  a  stiffening 
to  religious  conviction,  sent  countless  thousands  fleeing  to 
American  shores.  We  need  not  wink  at  the  fact  that  the 
immigrants  of  colonial  times  were  actuated  by  the  same 
motives  as  the  immigrants  today,  namely  a  determination  to 
escape  religious  or  political  oppression  and  a  desire  to  im 
prove  their  living  conditions.  To  make  this  generalization 
strictly  applicable  to  immigration  in  our  own  day,  one  might 


4         NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

wish  to  reverse  the  order  of  emphasis,  although  the  Russian 
Jews  and  the  Armenian  refugees  are  conspicuous  examples 
of  the  contrary. 

The  earliest  English  settlement,  that  at  Jamestown,  was 
sent  out  by  an  English  trading  corporation  which  was  inter 
ested  primarily  in  making  profits  for  the  stockholders  of  the 
company  out  of  the  industry  of  the  settlers.  In  a  like  spirit, 
that  canny  Quaker  William  Penn  lost  no  opportunity,  after 
the  first  settlements  were  made  in  his  dominion  of  Pennsyl 
vania,  to  stimulate  immigration  artificially,  for  the  result 
ing  enhancement  of  real  estate  values  meant  an  increased 
income  for  him.  He  advertised  his  lands  widely  through 
out  Europe,  offering  large  tracts  at  nominal  prices  and 
portraying  the  political  and  religious  advantages  of  resi 
dence  under  his  rule.  In  anticipation  of  later  practices,  he 
maintained  paid  agents  in  the  Rhine  Valley,  who  were  so 
successful  that  within  a  score  of  years  German  immigrants 
numbered  almost  one-half  of  the  population. 

Another  source  of  "assisted  immigration"  was  to  be 
found  in  the  practice  of  European  nations  to  drain  their 
almshouses  and  jails  into  their  colonies;  it  has  been  esti 
mated  that  as  many  as  fifty  thousand  criminals  were  sent  to 
the  thirteen  colonies  by  Great  Britain.  Due  allowance  must, 
of  course,  be  made  for  a  legal  code  which  condemned 
offenders  to  death  for  stealing  a  joint  of  meat  worth  more 
than  one  shilling!  Perhaps  one-half  of  all  the  white  immi 
grants  during  the  larger  part  of  the  colonial  period  were 
unable  to  pay  their  expenses.  They  came  "indentured"  and 
were  auctioned  off  for  a  period  of  service  by  the  ship  cap 
tains  in  payment  for  their  transportation.  Still  another 
element  of  the  population,  perhaps  one-fifth  of  the  whole  in 
the  eighteenth  century,  consisted  of  Guinea  negroes  who 
became  emigrants  to  the  New  World  only  through  the 
exercise  of  superior  force.  A  well-known  historian  is 


THE  INFLUENCE  OF  IMMIGRATION  5 

authority  for  the  statement  that  probably  one-third  of  the 
colonists  in  1760  were  born  outside  of  America. 

Men  of  older  colonial  stock  viewed  the  more  recent  comers 
with  a  species  of  alarm  that  was  to  be  repeated  with  each 
new  generation  of  the  American  breed.  Benjamin  Franklin 
declared  that  the  German  immigrants  pouring  into  Penn 
sylvania  "are  generally  the  most  stupid  of  their  own  nation. 
.  .  .  Not  being  used  to  liberty  they  know  not  how  to 
make  modest  use  of  it."  They  appear  at  elections  "in  droves 
and  carry  all  before  them,  except  in  one  or  two  counties. 
Few  of  their  children  know  English."  At  one  time  a  bill 
was  passed  by  the  colonial  legislature  of  Pennsylvania  to 
restrict  the  immigration  of  the  German  Palatines,  but  it  was 
vetoed  by  the  governor.  The  familiar  objections  to  immi 
gration  on  grounds  of  non-assimilability,  pauperism,  and 
criminality  originated  during  these  early  days,  leaving  for 
later  and  more  congested  times  the  development  of  argu 
ments  derived  from  the  fear  of  economic  competition. 

The  preponderance  of  English  settlers  in  the  first  century 
of  colonization  served  to  fix  governmental  institutions  and 
political  ideals  in  an  English  mold  and  to  make  English 
speech  the  general  language  of  the  colonists.  In  the  later 
colonial  period  most  of  New  England  retained  its  purely 
English  character  because  of  the  Puritan  policy  of  religious 
exclusiveness ;  but  into  the  other  colonies  alien  racial  ele 
ments  came  in  great  numbers  and  left  their  impress  on 
native  culture  and,  in  a  less  measure,  on  American  speech. 
It  is  instructive  to  remember  that  the  great  English  Puritan 
migration  did  not  exceed  twenty  thousand,  whereas  more 
than  one  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  Scotcn-Irish  Presby 
terians  settled  in  the  colonies  in  the  eighteenth  century.1 

1  These  were  lowland  Scots  who  had  been  transplanted  to  Ulster  early  in  the 
seventeenth  century.  Suffering  from  religious  and  political  disabilities  and 
afflicted  with  hard  times,  these  Ulstermen  sought  relief  through  migration  to 
the  colonies. 


6      NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

Unlike  the  Puritans,  the  Scotch-Irish  were  to  be  found  in 
nearly  five  hundred  settlements  scattered  through  all  the 
colonies  on  the  eve  of  the  Revolution;  and  being  every 
where  animated  with  a  fierce  passion  for  liberty,  they  served 
as  an  amalgam  to  bind  together  all  other  racial  elements 
in  the  population.  The  Germans,  who  numbered  over 
200,000  in  1776,  were  to  be  found  chiefly  in  western  New 
York,  and  particularly  in  the  western  counties  of  Pennsyl 
vania,  where  they  gave  rise  to  the  breed  which  we  call  the 
Pennsylvania  Dutch.  A  recent  student  of  the  subject  esti 
mates  that,  at  the  outbreak  of  the  War  for  Independence, 
about  one-tenth  of  the  total  population  was  German  and 
perhaps  one-sixth  Scotch-Irish. 

Since  the  best  sites  near  the  coast  were  pre-empted,  the 
Scotch-Irish  and  the  Germans  for  the  most  part  pushed 
into  the  valleys  of  the  interior  where  they  occupied  fertile 
farm  lands  and  acted  as  a  buffer  against  Indian  forays  on 
the  older  settlements.  Combining  with  the  native  whites 
in  the  back  country,  they  quickly  developed  a  group  con 
sciousness  due  to  the  organized  efforts  of  the  English- 
American  minorities  of  the  seaboard  to  minimize  the  influ 
ence  of  the  frontier  population  in  the  colonial  legislature 
and  courts ;  and  in  the  case  of  the  abortive  Regulator  uprising 
in  North  Carolina,  they  invoked  civil  war  to  secure  a  redress 
of  grievances.  Eventually  their  struggle  proved  to  be  the 
decisive  factor  in  establishing  the  two  American  principles 
of  equality  before  the  law  and  of  representation  upon  the 
basis  of  numbers.  When  the  disruption  with  Great  Britain 
approached,  the  non-English  strains  of  the  back  country 
lent  great  propulsive  force  to  the  movement  for  independ 
ence  and  republican  government.  They  were  probably  the 
deciding  factors  in  Pennsylvania  and  South  Carolina,  where 
the  ties  of  loyalty  binding  the  colonists  were  especially 
strong. 


THE  INFLUENCE  OF  IMMIGRATION  7 

Other  racial  strains  made  a  deep  impress  upon  the  history 
of  the  times.  Someone  has  pointed  out  that  eight  of  the 
men  most  prominent  in  the  early  history  of  New  York 
represented  eight  non-English  nationalities:  Schuyler,  of 
Dutch  descent;  Herkimer,  whose  parents  were  pure-blooded 
Germans  from  the  Rhine  Palatinate;  John  Jay,  of  French 
stock;  Livingston,  Scotch;  Clinton,  Irish;  Morris,  Welsh; 
Baron  Steuben,  Prussian;  and  Hoffman,  Swedish.  Of  the 
fifty-six  signers  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  eighteen 
were  of  non-English  stock  and,  of  these,  eight  were  born 
outside  of  the  colonies.  Joseph  Galloway,  the  Pennsylvania 
loyalist,  declared  before  a  committee  of  the  House  of  Com 
mons  in  1779  that  in  the  patriot  army  "there  were  scarcely 
one-fourth  natives  of  America — about  one-half  Irish,  the 
other  fourth  were  English  and  Scotch."  This  statement 
fails  to  do  justice  to  the  other  foreign-born  soldiers  who 
fought  in  the  War  for  Independence. 

ii 

Throughout  the  period  of  national  independence,  immi 
gration  continued  to  exert  a  profound  influence  on  the 
development  of  American  institutions,  political  ideals,  and 
industrial  life.  Within  ten  years  of  the  adoption  of  the 
Constitution,  immigration  received  unwelcome  recognition 
as  wielding  a  democratizing  influence  on  American  life. 
The  Federalist  party,  dominated  by  aristocratic  sympathies, 
was  determined  to  deal  a  death  blow  to  the  heresy  known 
variously  as  "mobocracy"  or  "democracy" ;  and  so  it  passed 
the  Alien  and  Sedition  Acts  and  the  Naturalization  Law  in 
1798  for  the  purpose  of  preventing  aliens  from  cultivating 
this  dangerous  doctrine  in  the  United  States.  The  party 
did  not  survive  this  legislation ;  but  its  hatred  of  the  foreigner 
in  America  continued  to  burn  unabated.  The  Hartford  Con 
vention  of  1814,  voicing  the  old  Federalist  spirit,  ascribed 


8      NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

the  fallen  state  of  the  country  partly  to  the  fact  that  mal 
contents  from  Europe  were  permitted  to  hold  office,  and 
demanded  that  the  Constitution  be  amended  to  disqualify 
immigrants,  even  though  naturalized,  from  holding  federal 
position.  Yet,  during  this  period,  two  of  the  foremost 
statesmen  of  the  nation  were  foreigners  by  birth:  Alex 
ander  Hamilton,  Washington's  great  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury,  a  native  of  the  West  Indies ;  and  Albert  Gallatin, 
Jefferson's  great  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  a  Swiss  by 
birth.  It  is  difficult  to  see  how  the  young  republic  could 
have  been  guided  safely  through  the  financial  perils  of  these 
first  critical  years  of  independence  without  the  genius  of 
these  two  men. 

Beginning  with  the  year  1820  the  numbers  of  foreigners 
migrating  into  the  United  States  each  decade  mounted 
rapidly,  passing  the  half -million  mark  during  the  thirties 
and  rising  above  the  two  and  a  half  million  mark  in  the 
decade  of  the  fifties.  The  racial  strains  represented  in  this 
migration  were  essentially  the  same  as  during  colonial  times, 
the  Teutonic  and  the  Celtic.  The  high-water  mark  in  the 
period  before  the  Civil  War  was  reached  when  the  tide  of 
immigration  brought  to  American  shores,  in  the  late  forties 
and  early  fifties,  great  numbers  of  German  liberals  who 
had  fled  Germany  because  of  the  failure  of  the  Revolution 
of  1848,  and  huge  numbers  of  famine-stricken  peasants  from 
central  and  southern  Ireland.  More  than  half  a  million 
Germans  sought  America  between  1830  and  1850,  and  nearly 
a  million  more  came  in  the  next  decade.  The  larger  portion 
of  these  went  into  the  Middle  West.  They  became  pioneers 
in  the  newer  parts  of  Ohio  and  in  Cincinnati ;  they  took  up 
the  hardwood  lands  of  the  Wisconsin  counties  along  Lake 
Michigan;  they  went  in  large  numbers  to  Michigan,  Illinois, 
Indiana,  Missouri  and  the  river  towns  of  Iowa.  This 
German  influx  contained  an  exceptionally  large  proportion 


THE  INFLUENCE  OF  IMMIGRATION  9 

of  educated  and  forceful  leaders,  men  and  women  who 
contributed  powerfully  to  the  spiritual  and  educational 
development  of  the  communities  in  which  they  settled  and 
whose  liberal  social  customs  were  at  interesting  variance 
with  the  inherited  Puritan  austerity  of  the  settlers  of  New 
England  extraction.  Virtually  all  the  western  states  per 
ceived  the  advantages  of  immigration  as  an  agency  for 
developing  their  resources;  and  emulating  the  example  of 
William  Penn  they  were  not  backward  in  appropriating 
money  and  establishing  agents  in  Europe  to  furnish  pro 
spective  emigrants  with  all  possible  information  as  to  the 
soil,  climate,  and  general  conditions  of  the  country.  Colonies 
of  European  peasants  began  to  be  established  in  many  parts 
of  the  West — at  one  time  it  appeared  that  Wisconsin  might 
become  exclusively  a  German  state. 

The  Irish  immigrants,  on  the  other  hand,  sought  the 
Eastern  cities  or  else  went  forth  into  the  construction  camps. 
These  were  the  years  during  which  roads,  canals,  and  public 
works  were  being  constructed  upon  an  extensive  scale  and 
the  first  railroads  were  being  projected.  The  hard  manual 
labor  for  these  enterprises  was  performed  mainly  by  the 
Irish.  The  congestion  of  the  Irish  in  the  eastern  cities  led 
to  many  evils,  none  more  startling  than  the  increases  in 
pauperism,  intemperance  and  illiteracy.  In  1838  it  was 
estimated  that  more  than  one-half  of  the  paupers  in  the 
country  were  of  foreign  birth.  A  committee  of  the  city  of 
Boston  reported  in  1849  on  the  "wretched,  dirty  and  un 
healthy  condition  of  a  great  number  of  the  dwelling  houses 
occupied  by  the  Irish  population,"  showing  that  each  room 
from  cellar  to  garret  was  likely  to  contain  one  or  more 
families.  Such  conditions  gave  great  impetus  to  the  numer 
ous  movements  for  humanitarian  reform  which  characterized 
the  thirties  and  forties.  Better  housing  conditions,  a  more 
humane  legal  code,  prohibition,  better  schools,  labor  reform — 


io    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

all  these  demands  received  increased  emphasis  because  of  the 
social  conditions  under  which  the  immigrants,  and  particu 
larly  the  Irish,  lived  in  the  Eastern  cities. 

As  a  result  of  the  heavy  immigration  of  the  forties  and 
fifties,  political  corruption  became  an  important  factor  in 
American  politics  for  the  first  time.  The  newly  arrived 
foreigner  fell  an  easy  prey  to  the  unscrupulous  native  poli 
tician  in  the  cities;  and  fraudulent  naturalization  papers, 
vote  buying,  and  similar  practices  became  so  notorious  that 
a  probe  committee  of  Congress  declared  in  1860:  "It  is 
well  known  to  the  American  people  that  stupendous  frauds 
have  been  perpetrated  in  the  election  of  1856,  in  Pennsyl 
vania,  by  means  of  forged  and  fictitious  naturalization 
papers."  President  Buchanan  wrote  that  "we  never  heard 
until  within  a  recent  period  of  the  employment  of  money  to 
carry  elections."  Much  of  the  immigrant  labor  came  in 
under  contract  to  private  corporations,  and  the  decade  of 
the  fifties  saw  the  first  effective  employment  of  arguments 
against  immigration  based  upon  the  plea  that  the  lower 
standard  of  living  of  the  foreigners  made  it  impossible  for 
native  laborers  to  compete  with  them. 

The  jealousy  and  ill  feeling  engendered  by  the  above 
causes  were  increased  by  religious  differences.  The  Irish 
were  mostly  Catholics ;  and  it  was  not  long  before  Catholic 
churches  began  to  rise  throughout  southern  New  England 
and  the  Middle  Atlantic  States,  and  convents  and  parochial 
schools  competed  with  the  public  schools,  which  were  coming 
to  be  looked  upon  as  the  true  basis  of  democracy.  The 
outcome  was  the  growth  of  a  powerful  movement  against 
immigration,  which  is  without  parallel  in  American  history. 
Calling  themselves  Native  Americans,  political  parties  were 
formed  in  New  York  and  other  eastern  cities  to  prevent  the 
election  of  foreign-born  citizens  to  office ;  and  ten  years  later, 
in  1845,  a  national  organization  was  effected  with  more 


THE  INFLUENCE  OF  IMMIGRATION         n 

than  one  hundred  thousand  members.  In  1850  the  move 
ment  assumed  the  guise  of  a  secret  organization  under  the 
name,  known  only  to  the  initiate,  of  The  Supreme  Order 
of  the  Star-Spangled  Banner.  Outsiders  lost  no  time  in 
dubbing  the  members  "Know  Nothings,"  since  the  rank  and 
file,  when  asked  regarding  the  mysteries  of  the  order,  in 
variably  replied:  "We  know  nothing."  Due  perhaps  to  the 
disturbed  state  of  politics  in  the  fall  of  1854  and  the  hesi 
tancy  of  many  citizens  to  take  a  definite  stand  on  the  slavery 
question  as  reopened  by  the  Kansas-Nebraska  Act,  the  party 
enjoyed  phenomenal  success,  carrying  six  states  and  failing 
in  seven  others  only  by  a  narrow  margin.  But  two  years 
later,  with  a  presidential  ticket  in  the  field,  the  party  showed 
little  strength,  having  succumbed  to  the  growing  popular 
absorption  in  the  slavery  controversy.  Several  attempts 
were  made  after  the  Civil  War  by  secret  societies  and  minor 
parties  to  revive  nativist  feeling  but  with  a  notable  lack  of 
success,  although,  as  we  shall  see  presently,  non-partisan 
political  agitation  during  the  same  period  has  resulted  in  the 
passage  of  certain  restrictive  measures  by  the  federal  govern 
ment. 

In  the  period  prior  to  the  Civil  War  the  stream  of  immi 
gration  had  been  turned  from  the  South  by  the  Mason  and 
Dixon  line,  for  the  free  laborers  of  Europe  could  not  profit 
ably  compete  with  the  slave  laborers  of  the  South.  Nearly 
all  the  immigrant  guidebooks  published  before  the  Civil 
War  warned  Europeans  against  the  presence  of  slavery  and 
the  strongly  intrenched  caste  system  in  that  section.  This 
avoidance  had  serious  results  for  the  South,  as  some 
economists  of  that  section  foresaw,  for  it  practically  pre 
cluded  that  diversification  of  industry  which  a  plentiful 
supply  of  cheap  white  labor  would  have  rendered  possible. 
Thus  the  economic  system  of  the  South  came  to  rest  more 
and  more  exclusively  upon  a  single  prop,  and  the  control 


12    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

of  southern  policy  fell  into  the  ambitious  hands  of  the 
cotton  planters.  Furthermore,  the  native  southern  stock, 
left  to  itself,  interbred,  and  the  mass  of  the  whites  were 
deprived  of  the  liberalizing  influences  of  contact  with  persons 
and  ideas  from  other  parts  of  the  world.  The  first  federal 
law  restricting  immigration  was  passed  during  this  period 
when  the  act  of  1807  forbade  the  future  introduction  of 
negro  slaves;  but  this  law  came  too  late  to  avert  the  evil 
consequences  flowing  from  the  earlier  unrestricted  importa 
tion  of  blacks. 

Meanwhile,  the  European  peasants  and  workingmen, 
predisposed  against  slavery  by  temperament  and  economic 
interest,  had  massed  themselves  in  the  North  and  helped  to 
stiffen  the  sentiment  of  that  section  against  an  institution 
that  was  an  anachronism  in  Europe.  It  is  but  a  slight 
indication  of  the  attitude  of  the  German  Americans  to  note 
that,  when  additional  federal  territory  was  opened  to  pos 
sible  slave  settlement  by  the  Kansas-Nebraska  Act,  eighty 
German  newspapers  out  of  eighty-eight  were  decidedly 
opposed  to  the  measure.  Who  can  estimate  of  what  vital 
consequence  it  was  to  the  future  of  a  united  country  that, 
in  the  eventful  decade  prior  to  the  outbreak  of  the  Civil 
War,  the  foreign  population  of  the  United  States  increased 
eighty-four  per  cent?  It  was  William  H.  Seward,  cam 
paigning  in  Missouri  in  1860  for  the  election  of  Lincoln, 
who  congratulated  the  state  upon  its  "onward  striving, 
freedom  loving  German  inhabitants"  and  declared  that 
"Missouri  must  be  Germanized  in  order  to  be  free."  In 
the  actual  fighting,  foreign-born  soldiers  played  a  notable 
part,  although  many  of  them  had  fled  Europe  to  escape  com 
pulsory  military  service.  It  is  perhaps  generally  known  that 
the  militia  companies  formed  among  the  Germans  in  Mis 
souri,  especially  in  St.  Louis,  were  pivotal  in  saving  that 
state  for  the  Union  in  the  early  months  of  the  war;  but  it 


THE  INFLUENCE  OF  IMMIGRATION         13 

is  not  so  well  known  that  both  the  Germans  and  the  Irish 
furnished  more  troops  to  the  federal  armies  in  proportion 
to  their  numbers  than  did  the  native-born  northerners. 

in 

Immigration  entered  a  new  phase  in  the  years  following 
the  Civil  War.  Prior  to  this  time  the  immigrants  had  been 
of  racial  strains  very  closely  related  to  the  original  settlers 
of  the  country.  Indeed,  from  one  point  of  view,  the 
American  people  in  the  ante  bellum  period  were  merely  a 
making-over,  in  a  new  environment,  of  the  old  English  race 
out  of  the  same  elements  which  had  entered  into  its  compo 
sition  from  the  beginning  in  England.  But  with  the  great 
industrial  expansion  in  America  after  the  war  and  the 
opening  of  many  steamship  lines  between  the  Mediterranean 
ports  and  the  United  States,  new  streams  of  immigration 
began  to  set  in  from  Southern  and  Eastern  Europe;  and 
this  new  invasion  with  its  lower  standards  of  living  caused 
a  reduction  in  the  old  Teutonic  and  Celtic  immigration  from 
Western  Europe.  The  change  began  to  be  apparent  about 
1885,  but  it  was  not  until  1896  that  the  three  currents  from 
Austria-Hungary,  Italy,  and  Russia  exceeded  in  volume  the 
contributions  of  the  United  Kingdom,  Germany,  and  Scan 
dinavia. 

On  the  Pacific  Coast  a  new  situation  also  arose,  due  to 
the  first  coming  of  thousands  of  Chinese  laborers  in  the 
fifties  and  sixties.  California  became  transformed  into  a 
battleground  for  a  determination  of  the  issue  whether  the 
immigrant  from  the  Orient  or  from  the  Occident  should 
perform  the  manual  work  of  the  Pacific  Coast.  In  this  con 
nection  it  is  suggestive  that  the  notorious  Dennis  Kearney, 
arch-agitator  of  the  Sand  Lots  against  the  Chinese  immi 
grant,  was  himself  a  native  of  the  County  Cork.  The  vic 
tory  ultimately  fell  to  the  European  immigrant  and  his 


14    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY' 

American  offspring  in  this  conflict  as  well  as  in  the  later  and 
more  familiar  one  with  the  Japanese  immigrant ;  and  by  one 
means  or  another  the  yellow  race  has  been  excluded  from 
further  entrance  into  the  United  States.  The  considered 
judgment  of  Americans  of  European  origin  seems  to  be 
that  no  Asiatic  strain  shall  enter  into  the  composite  American 
stock  or  make  its  first-hand  contribution  to  American  culture. 

Far  more  important  than  this  problem  has  been  the  effect 
of  the  latter-day  influx  from  Europe  upon  American  devel 
opment  and  ideals.  Since  1870  twenty-five  million  Euro 
peans  have  come  to  the  United  States  as  compared  with  pos 
sibly  one-third  of  that  number  in  the  entire  earlier  period 
of  independent  national  existence.  Professor  Ripley  pointed 
out  in  the  Atlantic  Monthly  in  1908  that  the  newcomers  of 
the  period  since  1900  would,  if  properly  distributed  over  the 
newer  parts  of  the  country,  serve  to  populate  no  less  than 
nineteen  states  of  the  Union.  These  immigrants  have  con 
tributed  powerfully  to  the  rapid  exploitation  of  the  country's 
natural  resources  and  to  the  establishment  of  modern  indus 
trialism  in  America.  The  German  and  Scandinavian  ele 
ments  among  the  immigrants  continued  to  seek  the  land,  and 
were  rushed  out  to  the  prairies  by  immigrant  trains  to  fill 
the  remaining  spaces  in  the  older  states  of  the  Middle  West. 
But  the  majority  of  the  latter-day  immigrants  avoided  agri 
culture  and  bore  the  brunt  of  the  manual  labor  of  building 
the  railroads  as  well  as  of  most  of  the  unskilled  work  in 
the  mines  and  the  great  basic  industries  of  the  country. 

A  characteristic  of  the  more  recent  immigration  has  been 
the  fact  that  approximately  one-third  of  the  newcomers  have 
returned  to  their  places  of  origin.  This  has  created  a  rest 
less,  migratory,  "bird  of  passage"  class  of  laborers,  lacking 
every  interest  in  the  permanent  advance  of  the  American 
working  class  and  always  competing  on  a  single-standard 
basis.  The  swarming  of  foreigners  into  the  great  industries 


THE  INFLUENCE  OF  IMMIGRATION         15 

occurred  at  considerable  cost  to  the  native  workingmen,  for 
the  latter  struggled  in  vain  for  higher  wages  or  better  con 
ditions  as  long  as  the  employers  could  command  the  services 
of  an  inexhaustible  supply  of  foreign  laborers.  Thus,  the 
new  immigration  has  made  it  easier  for  the  few  to  amass 
enormous  fortunes  at  the  expense  of  the  many  and  has 
helped  to  create  in  this  country  for  the  first  time  yawning 
inequalities  of  wealth. 

Most  sociologists  believe  that  the  addition  of  hordes  of 
foreigners  to  the  population  of  the  United  States  has  caused 
a  decline  in  the  birth-rate  of  the  old  American  stock,  for 
the  native  laborer  has  been  forced  to  avoid  large  families 
in  order  to  be  in  a  position  to  meet  the  growing  severity 
of  the  economic  competition  forced  upon  him  by  the  immi 
grant.  This  condition,  coupled  with  the  tendency  of  immi 
grant  laborers  to  crowd  the  native  Americans  farther  and 
farther  from  the  industrial  centers  of  the  country,  has 
caused  the  great  communities  and  commonwealths  of  the 
Atlantic  seaboard,  about  whose  names  cluster  the  heroic 
traditions  of  revolutionary  times,  to  change  completely  their 
original  characters.  According  to  the  census  of  1910,  Pur 
itan  New  England  is  today  the  home  of  a  population  of 
whom  two-thirds  were  born  in  foreign  lands  or  else  had 
parents  who  were.  Boston  is  as  cosmopolitan  a  city  as 
Chicago;  and  Faneuil  Hall  is  an  anachronism,  a  curiosity 
of  bygone  days  left  stranded  on  the  shores  of  the  Italian 
quarter.  In  fifteen  of  the  largest  cities  of  the  United  States 
the  foreign  immigrants  and  their  children  outnumber  the 
native  whites;  and  by  the  same  token  alien  racial  elements 
are  in  the  majority  in  thirteen  of  the  states  of  the  Union. 
When  President  Wilson  was  at  the  Peace  Conference,  he 
reminded  the  Italian  delegates  that  there  were  more  of  their 
countrymen  in  New  York  than  in  any  Italian  city;  and  it 
is  not  beside  the  point  to  add  here  that  New  York  is  also 


16    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

the  greatest  Irish  city  in  the  world  and  the  largest  Jewish 
city. 

Whatever  of  history  may  be  made  in  the  future  in  these 
parts  of  the  country  will  not  be  the  result  primarily  of  an 
"Anglo-Saxon"  heritage  but  will  be  the  product  of  the 
interaction  of  these  more  recent  racial  elements  upon  each 
other  and  their  joint  reaction  to  the  American  scene.  Unless 
the  unanticipated  should  intervene,  the  stewardship  of 
American  ideals  and  culture  is  destined  to  pass  to  a  new 
composite  American  type  now  in  the  process  of  making. 

Politically  the  immigration  of  the  last  half -century  has 
borne  good  fruit  as  well  as  evil.  The  intelligent  thoughtful 
immigrant  lacked  the  inherited  prejudices  of  the  native  voter 
and  was  less  likely  to  respond  to  ancient  catchwords , or  be 
stirred  by  the  revival  of  Civil  War  issues.  The  practice  of 
"waving  the  bloody  shirt"  was  abandoned  by  the  politicians 
largely  because  of  the  growing  strength  of  the  naturalized 
voters,  of  which  group  Carl  Schurz  was,  of  course,  the 
archtype.  In  place  of  this  practice  arose  a  new  one,  equally 
as  reprehensible,  by  which  the  major  parties  used  their 
political  patronage  and  their  platform  promises  to  angle  for 
the  support  of  naturalized  groups  among  the  voters.  No 
racial  group  has  been  as  assiduously  courted  by  the  poli 
ticians  as  the  Irish;  and  it  was  early  discovered  that  the 
easiest  way  to  gain  Irish  favor  was  to  feed  their  hatred  of 
England.  "Twisting  the  lion's  tail"  became  a  recognized 
and  successful  political  device,  as,  for  instance,  Alexander 
Mackay  observed  in  his  travels  in  the  United  States  as  early 
as  1846-1847;  and  incidentally  much  of  the  long-standing 
resentment  of  Americans  against  Great  Britain  may  be 
ascribed  to  the  uncalculated  effect  of  this  practice  upon  the 
public  generally.  In  1884  James  G.  Elaine,  the  Republican 
candidate  for  president,  had  good  reason  to  believe  that  he 
would  win  the  Irish  vote  when  an  indiscreet  supporter  lost 


THE  INFLUENCE  OF  IMMIGRATION         17 

the  election  for  him  by  prominently  identifying  his  name 
with  opposition  to  "Rum,  Romanism  and  Rebellion."  In 
the  next  two  presidential  elections  both  parties  found  it 
expedient  to  insert  in  their  platforms  forthright  declara 
tions  in  favor  of  home  rule  for  Ireland ! 

Generally  speaking,  racial  influences  have  been  most 
strongly  felt  in  state  and  local  politics  although  national 
parties  have  found  it  necessary  to  print  their  campaign  liter 
ature  in  as  many  as  sixteen  different  languages.  The  so- 
called  "hyphenated  American"  has  become  a  familiar  figure 
in  the  last  few  years  merely  because  the  World  War  has 
made  native-born  citizens  take  serious  cognizance  of  the 
polyglot  political  situation;  and  the  activity  of  the  German- 
American  Alliance  in  the  campaign  of  1916  is  an  illustration 
of  how  dangerous  to  the  national  welfare  the  meddling  of 
racial  groups  among  the  voters  may  become. 

To  the  immigrant  must  also  be  assigned  the  responsibility 
for  the  accelerated  growth  of  political  and  industrial  radical 
ism  in  this  country.  While  most  of  the  newcomers  quietly 
accepted  their  humble  place  in  American  society,  a  minority 
of  the  immigrants  consisted  of  political  refugees  and  other  j  / 
extremists,  embittered  by  their  experiences  in  European 
countries  and  suspicious  of  constituted  authority  under 
whatever  guise.  These  men  represented  the  Left  Wing  in 
their  revolt  against  political  authority  in  Europe  just  as  three 
centuries  earlier  the  Pilgrims  comprised  the  Left  Wing  in 
their  struggle  against  ecclesiastical  authority. 

Since  radicalism  is  a  cloak  covering  a  multitude  of  dissents 
and  affirmations,  the  influence  of  these  men  may  be  traced 
in  a  wide  variety  of  programs  of  social  reconstruction  and 
movements  for  humanitarian  reform.  The  first  Socialist 
parties  in  the  United  States  were  organized  by  German 
Americans  in  the  years  following  the  Civil  War;  and 
political  Socialism,  in  its  type  of  organization,  terminology, 


i8    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

and  methods  of  discipline,  can  hardly  yet  be  said  to  be 
fully  acclimated  to  the  New  World.  Violence  and  anarchism 
were  first  introduced  into  the  American  labor  movement  in 
the  eighties  by  Johann  Most  and  his  associates,  the  greater 
number  of  whom,  like  Most  himself,  were  of  alien  birth; 
and  the  contemporaneous  I.W.W.  movement  finds  its  chief 
strength  in  the  support  of  the  migratory  foreign-born 
laborer.  Even  the  Non-partisan  League  may  not  be  hailed, 
though  some  would  so  have  it,  as  a  product  of  an  indigenous 
American  Socialism,  for  this  organization  originated  and  has 
enjoyed  its  most  spectacular  successes  in  a  western  common 
wealth  in  which  70  per  cent  of  the  people  were  natives  of 
Europe  or  are  the  children  of  foreign-born  parents. 

The  new  immigration  from  Southern  and  Eastern  Europe, 
with  its  lower  standard  of  living  and  characteristic  racial 
differences,  has  intensified  many  existing  social  problems  and 
created  a  number  of  new  ones,  particularly  in  the  centers 
of  population.  The  modern  programs  for  organized  and 
scientific  philanthropy  had  their  origin  very  largely  in  the 
effort  to  cure  these  spreading  social  sores.  Out  of  this 
situation  has  also  grown  a  new  anti-immigration  or  nativist 
movement,  unrelated  to  similar  movements  of  earlier  times 
and  indeed  regarding  with  approval  the  very  racial  groups 
against  which  the  earlier  agitation  had  been  directed.  This 
new  movement  has  functioned  most  effectively  through  non- 
partisan  channels,  particularly  through  that  of  organized 
labor,  and  has  commanded  strong  support  in  both  parties. 
Whereas  immigrants  had  virtually  all  been  admitted  without 
let  or  hindrance  down  to  1875,  a  number  of  laws  have  been 
passed  since  then  with  the  primary  purpose  of  removing  the 
worst  evils  of  indiscriminate  immigration,  the  severest 
restriction  being  the  literacy  test  affixed  in  191 7.1  This  con 
temporary  nativism  cannot  justify  its  existence  by  reason 

1  In  1921  a  law  was  passed,  professedly  to  meet  a  temporary  situation,  re 
stricting  the  annual  immigration  from  any  country  to  three  per  cent  of  the 
number  of  aliens  of  that  country  in  the  United  States  in  1910. 


THE  INFLUENCE  OF  IMMIGRATION         19 

of  the  large  proportion  of  aliens  as  compared  with  the  native 
population,  for,  as  Professor  Max  Farrand  has  recently 
shown,  immigration  was  on  a  proportionately  larger  scale 
in  colonial  times  than  during  the  last  fifty  years.  It  owes 
its  being,  doubtless,  to  the  tendency  of  the  latter-day  immi 
grants  to  settle  in  portions  of  the  country  that  are  already 
thickly  populated  and  to  the  fact  that  the  Americans  of  older 
stock  can  no  longer  find  relief  from  industrial  competition 
by  taking  up  government  land  in  the  West. 

IV 

No  modern  people  is  compounded  of  such  heterogeneous 
ingredients  as  the  American.  That  American  manners  and 
culture  owe  much  to  this  admixture  there  can  be  little  doubt 
though  such  influences  are  pervasive  and  intangible  and 
their  value  not  easy  to  assess.  Of  the  older  racial  strains, 
the  irrepressible  good  humor  and  executive  qualities  of  the 
Irish,  the  solidity  and  thoroughness  of  the  German,  the 
tenacity  and  highmindedness  of  the  Scotch-Irish,  the  law- 
abiding  qualities  of  the  English,  and  the  sobriety  and  industry 
of  the  Scandinavian  have  undoubtedly  made  important  con 
tributions  to  our  national  character. 

The  fine  arts  in  America  have  been  developed  largely  by 
men  of  mixed  blood.  One  critic  (Mencken)  would  even 
have  us  believe  that  the  "low  caste  Anglo-Saxons"  who 
formed  the  vast  proportion  of  the  English  migration  to 
America  were  jncapable  of  producing  original  ideas,  thus 
leaving  intellectual  experimentation  necessarily  to  immi 
grants  of  different  antecedents.  Although  this  assertion  is 
an  exaggeration,  Mencken  is  able  to  marshal  an  imposing 
array  of  novelists,  artists  and  poets  in  support  of  his  con 
tention — Walt  Whitman  who  was  half  Dutch,  James  with  an 
Irish  grandfather,  Poe  who  was  partly  German,  Howells 
who  was  largely  German  and  Irish,  etc. 

Foreign    cultural   influences,    which   in   any   case   would 


20    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

have  been  reflected  in  the  artistic  strivings  of  a  new  country 
like  America,  were  reinvigorated  by  the  presence  in  our 
population  of  the  representatives  of  many  different  foreign 
nationalities.  As  Mencken  again  points  out,  our  music  is 
almost  wholly  German  or  Italian ;  our  painting  is  French ; 
our  literature  may  be  anything  from  English  to  Russian ;  our 
architecture  is  likely  to  be  a  phantasmagoria  of  borrow 
ings.  The  American  educational  system  from  kindergarten 
to  university  has  been  patterned  upon  German  models. 
"Even  so  elemental  an  art  as  that  of  cookery  shows  no  native 
development"  for  "any  decent  restaurant  that  one  blunders 
upon  in  the  land  is  likely  to  be  French,  and  if  not  French, 
then  Italian  or  German  or  Chinese." 

It  is  not  fantastic  to  believe  that,  during  three  centuries 
of  history,  the  immigrant  elements  in  our  population  have 
not  only  profoundly  influenced  the  cultural,  institutional, 
and  material  development  of  the  United  States,  but  have 
also  been  largely  responsible  for  distilling  that  precious 
essence  which  we  call  American  idealism.  The  bold  man 
falters  when  asked  to  define  American  idealism,  but  four 
of  its  affirmative  attributes  are  assuredly  a  deep  abiding 
faith  in  the  common  man,  the  right  of  equality  of  oppor 
tunity,  toleration  of  all  creeds  and  opinions,  and  a  high 
regard  for  the  rights  of  weaker  nations.  The  great  mass  of 
immigrants  came  to  the  New  World  to  attest  their  devotion 
to  one  or  all  of  these  ideals — they  came  as  protestants  against 
tyranny,  injustice,  intolerance,  militarism,  as  well  as  against 
economic  oppression.  Nor  is  more  concrete  evidence  lacking 
to  show  that  neither  they  nor  their  sons  rested  until  these 
great  principles  were  firmly  woven  into  the  fabric  of  Amer 
ican  thought  and  political  practice. 

During  the  last  five  years  the  United  States  has  risen  to 
a  position  of  world  leadership  in  a  sense  never  realized  by 
any  other  country  in  history.  Sober  reflection  convinces 


THE  INFLUENCE  OF  IMMIGRATION         21 

one  that  this  was  not  an  accident  due  to  one  man's  person 
ality  :  it  grew  out  of  the  inevitable  logic  of  a  situation  which 
found  the  United  States  an  amalgam  of  all  the  peoples  at 
war.  Although  the  old  stocks  continued  belligerent  and 
apart  in  Europe,  the  warring  nations  instinctively  turned 
for  leadership  to  that  western  land  where  the  same  racial 
breeds  met  and  mingled  and  dwelt  in  harmony  with  each 
other.  Observers  in  Europe  during  the  war  testified  to  the 
willingness  with  which  all  classes  of  people  in  the  various 
countries  were  ready  to  hearken  to  and  follow  the  country 
whose  liberal  spirit  they  knew  from  the  letters  of  their 
friends  in  America  or  from  their  own  experiences  there. 
In  the  great  world-drama  President  Wilson  played  a  pre 
destined  part;  by  reason  of  his  position  as  spokesman  of 
the  American  people  he  was  the  historic  embodiment  of  the 
many  national  traditions  inherent  in  a  nation  formed  of 
many  nations.  This  would  seem  to  foreshadow  the  role 
which,  for  good  or  ill,  the  United  States  is  fated  to  play  in 
the  future.  Those  who,  in  the  discussions  over  the  League 
of  Nations,  have  advocated  that  the  United  States  should 
occupy  a  position  of  isolation  and  irresponsibility  have  failed 
to  grasp  this  great  fundamental  truth. 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

There  is  a  vast  literature  on  immigration  in  the  form  of  books, 
magazine  articles  and  reports  of  the  federal  and  state  governments. 
Practically  all  these  writers  have  studied  immigration  as  a  social 
problem  and  have  given  little  or  no  attention  to  immigration  as  a 
dynamic  factor  in  American  development.  Readers  interested  in 
the  latter  phase  may,  however,  find  relevant  material  in  the  follow 
ing  works:  Henry  Pratt  Fairchild's  Immigration  (New  York, 
1917),  chaps,  ii-vi;  Max  Farrand's  "Immigration  in  the  Light  of 
History"  in  the  New  Republic,  December  2,  9,  16,  23,  1916;  Frank 
Julian  Warne's  The  Tide  of  Immigration  (New  York,  1916),  chaps, 
xii,  xx ;  and  Samuel  P.  Orth's  Our  Foreigners  (in  the  Chronicles 
of  America  Series,  vol.  35;  New  Haven,  1920).  Scattered  through 
the  eight  volumes  of  John  Bach  McMaster's  History  of  the  People 


22    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

of  the  United  States  (New  York,  1883-1913)  may  be  found  many 
references  fo  immigration  from  1783  to  the  Civil  War. 

Notwithstanding  these  fragmentary  discussions,  this  vital  approach 
to  an  understanding  of  American  history  has  been  neglected  by  the 
historians  generally.  No  field  is  more  fruitful  and  many  years  of 
devoted  research  will  be  required  to  exploit  fully  its  possibilities. 

There  is  a  valuable  and  growing  literature  dealing  historically  with 
separate  racial  elements  in  the  United  States.  Many  of  these  works 
have  to  be  used  with  caution  because  of  the  temptation  of  the 
author  to  give  undue  importance  to  the  nationality  with  which  he 
is  dealing.  Of  these  works  some  of  the  more  valuable  are: 
Rasmus  B.  Anderson's  The  First  Chapter  of  Norwegian  Immigra 
tion  (1821-1840)  (Madison,  1896)  ;  Kendric  C.  Babcock's  The 
Scandinavian  Element  in  the  United  States  (Urbana,  1914)  ;  Emily 
Greene  Balch's  Our  Slavic  Fellow  Citizens  (New  York,  1910)  ; 
Charles  S.  Bernheimer's  The  Russian  Jew  in  America  (Philadelphia, 
1905)  ;  Ernest  Bruncken's  German  Political  Refugees  in  the  United 
States  during  the  Period  from  1815-1860  (Chicago,  1904)  ;  Thomas 
Burgess's  Greeks  in  America  (Boston,  1913)  ;  Thomas  Capek's  The 
Czechs  in  America  (Boston,  1920)  ;  Mary  Roberts  Coolidge's 
Chinese  Immigration  (New  York,  1909)  ;  J.  G.  Craighead's  Scotch 
and  Irish  Seeds  in  American  Soil  (Philadelphia,  1879)  ;  Henry  Pratt 
Fairchild's  Greek  Immigration  to  the  United  States  (New  Haven, 
1911)  ;  Albert  B.  Faust's  The  German  Element  in  the  United  States 
(2  v.;  Boston,  1909);  George  T.  Flom's  A  History  of  Norwegian 
Immigration  to  the  United  States  (Iowa  City,  1909)  ;  Henry 'Pbnes 
Ford's  The  Scotch-Irish  in  America  (Princeton,  1915)  ;  Charles  A. 
Hanna's  The  Scotch-Irish  (2  v. ;  New  York,  1902);  George  Ford 
Huizinga's  What  the  Dutch  Have  Done  in  the  West  of  the  United 
States  (Philadelphia,  1909)  ;  Amandus  Johnson's  The  Swedes  in 
America,  1638-1900  (Philadelphia,  1914)  ;  Stanley  C.  Johnson's  A 
History  of  Emigration  from  the  United  Kingdom  to  North  America 
1763-1912  (London,  1913)  ;  Eliot  Lord,  J.  J.  D.  Trenor  and  Samuel 
J.  Barrows's  The  Italian  in  America  (New  York,  1905)  ;  John 
Francis  Maguire's  The  Irish  in  America  (London,  1868)  ;  Thomas 
D'Arcy  McGee's  A  History  of  the  Irish  Settlers  in  North  America 
(Boston,  1850)  ;  H.  A.  Millis's  The  Japanese  Problem  in  the  United 
States  (New  York,  1915);  O.  N.  Nelson's  History  of  the  Scandi 
navians  and  Successful  Scandinavians  in  the  United  States  (2  v. ; 
Minneapolis,  1904)  ;  Madison  C.  Peters's  The  Jews  in  America 
(Philadelphia,  1905);  Ruth  Putnam's  "The  Dutch  Element  in  the 
United  States"  in  the  Annual  Report  of  the  American  Historical 
Association  for  1909,  pp.  205-218;  Peter  Ross's  The  Scot  in  America 
(New  York,  1896)  ;  Benjamin  Brawley's  A  Social  History  of  the 
American  Negro  (New  York,  1921). 

A  suggestive  biographical  approach  to  the  historical  influence  of 
immigration  is  Joseph  Husband's  Americans  by  Adoption  (Boston, 
1920),  a  volume  in  which  the  lives  of  nine  eminent  Americans  of 
foreign  birth  are  dealt  with,  among  them  Agassiz,  Schurz,  Carnegie, 
St.  Gaudens  and  Jacob  A.  Riis. 


CHAPTER  II 

GEOGRAPHIC  FACTORS  IN  AMERICAN  DEVELOPMENT 

"Man  can  no  more  be  scientifically  studied  apart  from 
the  ground  which  he  tills,  or  the  lands  over  which  he  travels, 
or  the  sea  over  which  he  trades,  than  polar  bear  or  desert 
cactus  can  be  understood  apart  from  its  habitat.  .  .  . 
Man  has  been  so  noisy  about  the  way  he  has  'conquered 
Nature/  and  Nature  has  been  so  silent  in  her  persistent 
influence  over  man,  that  the  geographic  factor  in  the  equa 
tion  of  human  development  has  been  overlooked."  That 
the  geographic  factor  has  played  an  important  part  in  shap 
ing  the  history  of  the  American  people  no  thoughtful  person 
can  deny.  The  conformation  of  the  Atlantic  coast,  the 
mountains  and  plains  and  virgin  forests  of  the  interior,  the 
frequency  of  water  courses  and  the  variations  of  climate 
and  soil  have  all  left  their  impress  upon  the  manner  and 
quality  of  American  development.  In  a  strict  sense  of  the 
term,  geographic  influences  are  to  be  regarded  as  those 
influences  exerted  on  man  by  the  exterior  physical  features 
of  the  earth;  but,  for  all  practical  purposes,  variations  in 
temperature  and  moisture  may  be  included  as  a  part  of  the 
physical  conditions  because  of  the  close  connection  between 
physiography  and  climate. 

In  American  history  two  features  of  the  geographic  sit 
uation  have  been  of  commanding  importance:  the  sheer 
distance  of  the  New  World  from  the  Old ;  and  the  physio- 
graphical  peculiarities  of  the  North  American  continent. 
Although,  of  course,  these  two  aspects  of  American  geog- 

23 


24    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

raphy  were  parts  of  an  inseparable  whole  and  constantly 
interacted  upon  each  other,  their  historical  consequences  will 
be  examined  separately  for  purposes  of  the  present  discus 
sion. 

I 

So  real  was  the  physical  isolation  of  the  New  World  that 
the  Christian  era  was  fifteen  hundred  years  old  before  the 
existence  of  the  western  hemisphere  was  known  to  educated 
Europe.  European  peoples  emerged  from  barbarism,  great 
empires  arose  and  fell,  religious  conflicts  devastated  the  fair 
fields  of  the  continent,  while  the  New  World  remained  undis 
covered — a  tremendous  reserve  of  land  with  resources  prac 
tically  untouched  by  its  primitive  inhabitants.  Even 
Cohunbus's  voyage  might  not  have  led  to  the  rapid  opening 
up  of  the  New  World  had  he  not  been  favored  by  Nature 
in  the  selection  of  his  place  of  embarkation  and  the  presence 
of  favorable  trade  winds.  Due  to  these  fortunate  circum 
stances,  he  chanced  to  discover  a  portion  of  the  western  land 
that  utterly  charmed  a  South  European  with  its  tropical 
climate,  luxuriant  vegetation  and  promise  of  trading  possi 
bilities.  If,  like  John  and  Sebastian  Cabot,  he  had  touched 
upon  a  bleak  and  barren  coast,  the  subsequent  development 
of  the  Americas  would  have  proceeded  at  a  much  slower 
pace. 

As  colonies  came  to  be  planted  in  the  western  hemisphere 
by  rival  European  powers,  their  American  settlements  found 
themselves  drawn  into  wars  that  were  the  outgrowth  of 
purely  European  causes  and  in  which  they  had  only  a 
secondary  interest.  Geographic  remoteness  did  not  serve 
in  this  instance  as  a  means  of  insulation ;  but  the  preoccupa 
tion  of  the  European  monarchs  with  international  politics 
combined  with  the  distant  situation  of  the  colonies  to  invite 
an  attitude  of  inattention  and  laxness  on  the  part  of  the 
mother  countries  toward  matters  of  routine  colonial  admin- 


GEOGRAPHIC  FACTORS  25 

istration.  This  affected  the  celonial  development  of  the 
settlements  of  different  countries  in  different  ways.  While 
the  Spanish  and  French  colonists  found  themselves  placed  at 
the  mercy  of  tyrannous  and  incompetent  local  officials, 
the  English  colonies  possessing  liberal  charters  made  the 
most  of  their  opportunity  to  work  out  a  system  of  colonial 
home  rule  untroubled  by  active  interference  from  the  mother 
country.  Indeed,  the  English  settlers  cherished  govern 
mental  ideals  and  enjoyed  political  rights  which  far  exceeded 
those  of  their  kinsmen  in  England. 

As  new  generations  grew  up  in  the  thirteen  colonies  who 
had  themselves  never  seen  England,  it  was  inevitable  that 
the  colonists  should  unconsciously  begin  to  think  of  them 
selves  as  a  people  possessing  interests  apart  from  the  mother 
country  and  deserving  recognition  and  protection  from  her. 
The  psychology  of  the  colonists  in  1765  was,  in  an  im 
portant  degree,  the  imperceptible  outgrowth  of  many  years 
of  geographic  "separation.  Such  a  people  very  naturally 
regarded  the  new  plan  of  imperial  control,  inaugurated  by 
Grenville  in  1764-1765,  as  the  unjustifiable  interference  of 
an  "alien"  government.  An  extreme  though  not  unrepre 
sentative  expression  of  this  attitude  may  be  found  in  the 
resolutions  of  the  town  of  Windham,  Massachusetts,  in 
1774,  to  the  effect  that  "neither  the  Parliament  of  Britain 
nor  the  Parliament  of  France  nor  any  other  Parliament  but 
that  which  sits  supreme  in  our  Province  has  a  Right  to  lay 
any  Taxes  on  us  for  the  purpose  of  Raising  a  Revenue." 

The  success  of  the  Americans  in  the  War  for  Independ 
ence  was  closely  related  to  the  geographic  conditions  of  war 
fare.  Fighting  on  their  own  ground,  the  little  American 
armies  utilized  their  familiarity  with  the  topography  to 
launch  attacks  and  effect  strategic  retreats  which  left  the 
slow-moving  British  armies  at  a  loss.  The  powerful  British 
aggregations  were  forced  to  rely  upon  water  transport  and 


26    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

were  never  able  to  penetrate  into  the  back-country  sufficiently 
to  destroy  the  American  forces. 

Far-seeing  statesmen  in  the  early  years  of  our  national 
independence  fully  appreciated  the  safety  afforded  by  our 
physical  aloofness  from  Europe  and  sought  to  make  this 
fact  the  cornerstone  of  American  foreign  policy.  "Our 
detached  and  distant  situation,"  wrote  Washington  in  his 
Farewell  Address,  "invites  and  enables  us  to  pursue  a 
different  course"  from  that  of  Europe  with  her  never-ceasing 
international  embroilments.  "Why  forego  the  advantages 
of  so  peculiar  a  situation?  Why  quit  our  own  to  stand 
upon  foreign  ground?  Why,  by  interweaving  our  destiny 
with  that  of  any  part  of  Europe,  entangle  our  peace  and 
prosperity  in  the  toils  of  European  ambition,  rivalship, 
interest,  humor,  or  caprice?" 

Events  of  the  next  twenty-five  years  caused  the  same 
thought  to  be  repeated  with  increasing  emphasis  by  Jefferson 
and  later  presidents.  In  the  period  from  1793  to  1815, 
we  know  that  geographic  remoteness  alone  protected 
America  from  the  devastating  blows  of  Napoleonic  ambition 
showered  so  freely  upon  the  continental  countries  of 
Europe.  It  seems  safe  to  conjecture  that,  if  the  new  Amer 
ican  republic  had  been  situated  closer  to  the  hotbed  of 
European  politics  and  intrigue,  her  course  would  have  been 
beset  with  peril  at  every  turn,  a  danger  not  to  be  lightly 
regarded  at  a  time  when  men  like  Alexander  Hamilton 
viewed  the  Constitution  as  "a  frail  and  worthless  fabric" 
and  republican  government  in  general  as  a  doubtful  experi 
ment.  As  it  was,  the  United  States  became  involved  in  a 
quarrel  over  her  neutral  rights  on  the  high  seas  with  both 
Great  Britain  and  France,  a  controversy  that  yielded  a  naval 
conflict  with  France  in  1798  and  a  second  war  with  Great 
Britain  in  1812.  Thus,  it  was  from  a  purpose  to  capitalize 
our  favored  geographic  situation  that  there  originated  that 


GEOGRAPHIC  FACTORS  27 

well-established  practice  of  American  foreign  policy,  which  is 
summed  up  in  the  familiar  phrase :  no  entangling  alliances. 

Another  great  principle  of  American  diplomacy  owed  its 
origin  largely  to  geographical  considerations.  The  width 
of  the  Atlantic  and  the  physical  proximity  of  the  Spanish 
American  colonies  were  controlling  factors  in  the  formula 
tion  of  the  Monroe  Doctrine.  A  series  of  revolutions  had 
swept  through  these  colonies  beginning  about  1810;  and 
in  1822  it  appeared  that  the  so-called  Holy  Alliance  of 
European  despotisms  would  take  active  steps  to  reconquer 
them.  The  remoteness  of  Europe  from  these  colonies  em 
boldened  the  United  States  solemnly  to  warn  the  powers 
against  intervention,  an  action  which  the  actual  military 
strength  of  the  United  States  in  no  sense  justified.  The 
interests  of  the  United  States  were  directly  involved  in  the 
situation,  for  the  success  of  European  intervention  would 
have  led  to  the  re-establishment  of  a  principle  of  govern 
ment,  near  our  boundaries,  which  Americans  regarded  as  a 
menace  to  national  security.  Hence,  while  sympathy  with 
the  spread  of  republican  ideas  was  instinct  in  President 
Monroe's  message,  he  explicitly  emphasized  the  thought: 
"It  is  impossible  that  the  allied  powers  should  extend  their 
political  system  to  any  portion  of  either  [American]  conti 
nent  without  endangering  our  peace  and  happiness.  .  .  . 
It  is  equally  impossible,  therefore,  that  we  should  behold 
such  interposition,  in  any  form,  with  indifference." 

Generally  speaking,  the  history  of  American  foreign  rela 
tions  has  been  marked  by  enlightened  views  of  international 
right  adopted  in  advance  of  the  leading  European  powers. 
"From  the  beginning  of  its  political  history,"  says  John  W. 
Foster,  the  United  States  has  "made  itself  the  champion  of 
a  freer  commerce,  of  a  sincere  and  genuine  neutrality,  of 
respect  for  private  property  in  war,  of  the  most  advanced 
ideas  of  natural  rights  and  justice ;  and  in  its  brief  existence 


28    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

of  a  century,  by  its  example  and  persistent  diplomatic 
advocacy,  it  has  exerted  a  greater  influence  in  the  recognition 
of  these  elevated  principles  than  any  other  nation  of  the 
world."  Here  again  geographic  situation  coincided  with 
enlightened  diplomatic  statesmanship,  for,  being  a  country 
remote  from  the  storm  center  of  the  world's  wars,  the 
interests  of  the  United  States  were  usually  those  of  a  nation 
at  peace,  and  her  object  has  been  to  secure  for  her  citizens 
rights  and  privileges  as  nearly  approximating  those  of  peace 
time  as  possible.  The  liberal  views  of  American  statesmen 
on  such  questions  as  contraband  of  war,  definition  of  a  block 
ade  and  the  inviolability  of  neutral  vessels  from  search  were, 
to  a  large  extent,  inspired  by  the  unique  geographic  position 
of  the  United  States  and  by  the  peculiar  commercial  ad 
vantages  inherent  in  such  a  position. 

Since  the  Civil  War  much  of  the  physical  isolation  of 
the  United  States  has  disappeared  and  the  foreign  policy  of 
the  nation  has  tended  to  change  correspondingly.  The 
steamship  and  the  cable,  the  wireless  and  the  airplane  have 
all  helped  to  cause  the  earth  to  shrink  and  to  bring  North 
America  closer  to  the  shores  of  Europe.  After  all,  distance 
is  not  a  matter  of  miles  but,  in  terms  of  human  relationships, 
it  consists  in  the  length  of  time  required  to  travel  from  one 
place  to  another.  In  stage-coach  days  Boston  and  Charleston, 
South  Carolina,  were  farther  removed,  for  all  practical  pur 
poses,  than  are  New  York  and  Havre  in  this  age  of  steam 
and  electricity;  and  the  distance  between  Philadelphia  and 
New  York  was  greater  than  an  aerial  flight  from  New 
foundland  to  England  today. 

When  the  republics  of  the  western  hemisphere,  led  by 
the  United  States,  became  participants  in  the  World  War, 
their  action  signalized  the  final  crumbling  of  the  barrier  of 
distance  before  the  onslaughts  of  modern  science;  and  an 
irrecoverable  blow  was  inflicted  on  an  illusion  of  isolation 


GEOGRAPHIC  FACTORS  29 

which  had,  in  fact,  ceased  to  exist.  The  peoples  of  the 
earth  were  shocked  into  a  realization  of  a  new  world  of 
contracted  dimensions,  a  world  that  had  become  a  neighbor 
hood.  A  scheme  for  world  peace  through  international 
organization  was  the  natural  concomitant  of  such  a  situa 
tion. 

Many  Americans  deplore  the  passing  of  "splendid  isola 
tion";  but  it  should  always  be  remembered  that  isolation 
was  of  greatest  importance  to  the  United  States  when  the 
republic  was  small  and  weak,  when,  as  Washington  phrased 
it  in  his  Farewell  Address,  it  was  necessary  "to  gain  time 
to  our  country  to  settle  and  mature  its  yet  recent  institu 
tions,  and  to  progress  without  interruption  to  that  degree  of 
strength  and  consistency  .  .  .  necessary  to  give  it  ... 
the  command  of  its  own  fortunes."  With  the  geographic 
barriers  down,  America  stands  face  to  face  with  new  inter 
national  duties  and  responsibilities. 

ii 

Not  only  were  the  interrelations  of  Europe  and  the 
western  hemisphere  affected  by  geographic  conditions  but, 
from  first  to  last,  the  internal  development  of  America  was 
strongly  modified  by  the  same  influences.  The  advance 
of  European  "discovery  and  exploration  was  determined 
largely  by  the  sinuosities  of  the  coastline  and  the  conforma 
tion  of  the  interior.  The  rapidity  with  which  the  New 
World  was  opened  to  European  colonization  was  likewise 
dependent  upon  accidents  of  physiography.  And,  as  we 
shall  see,  the  dispersion  of  the  later  settlers  throughout  the 
vast  hinterland  of  the  continent  was  subject  to  a  similar 
control.  The  discoverers  and  pioneers  sometimes  found 
Nature  a  harsh  taskmaster,  but  more  often  they  were  likely 
to  find  in  her  a  lavish  patron. 

Columbus's  voyages  had  been  prompted  by  a  desire  to 


30    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

discover  a  direct  western  route  to  the  Far  East;  and  when 
the  truth  was  in  time  made  known  to  the  world  that,  instead 
of  discovering  the  Orient,  he  had  in  reality  found  a  great 
continental  barrier  blocking  the  route,  the  minds  of  discov 
erers  became  obsessed  with  a  new  idea,  the  possibility  of 
finding  a  water  passage  through  the  American  continents. 
Every  promising  inlet  or  gulf  along  the  shoreline  now 
became  the  object  of  exploration.  Cartier,  Newport,  Hud 
son,  Verrazano,  Magellan,  Champlain  and  a  host  of  other 
adventurers,  representing  many  different  nations,  took  part 
in  the  fascinating  game — and  their  efforts  vastly  broadened 
European  knowledge  of  the  topography  and  economic  re 
sources  of  the  New  World. 

After  a  time  the  quest  for  a  transcontinental  waterway 
became  of  secondary  consideration,  for  the  interest  of  the 
discoverers  and  explorers  had  become  captured  by  the  allur 
ing  possibilities  of  America  itself.  Indeed,  such  an  interest 
had  been  in  evidence  from  the  beginning;  but  it  did  not 
become  the  dominant  motive  of  exploration  until  half  a 
century  or  more  had  elapsed  after  Columbus's  first  voyage. 
It  was  a  fortunate  circumstance  that,  unlike  the  Pacific  coast, 
the  Atlantic  shoreline  of  North  America  presented  an  invit 
ing  front  to  European  seekers,  offering  so  many  open  doors 
to  the  venturesome  newcomers  in  its  numerous  rivers  and 
indentations  and  in  its  spacious  Gulf  of  Mexico.  In  those 
primitive  days  of  travel  the  location  and  frequency  of 
navigable  waters  were  the  controlling  factors  in  directing 
the  progress  of  exploration. 

The  Spaniards  were  for  many  years  the  most  active  in 
investigating  the  mysteries  of  the  New  World.  Following 
the  route  of  Columbus  into  the  Gulf  of  Mexico,  the  Spanish 
explorers  and  conquest  ad  ores  fell  under  the  spell  of  that 
great  inland  sea,  not  unlike  their  own  Mediterranean;  and 
using  it  as  their  base  of  operations,  they  launched  a  series 


GEOGRAPHIC  FACTORS  31 

of  explorations  and  conquests,  to  the  north  and  the  west  and 
the  south,  which  yielded  them  almost  the  whole  of  South 
America  and  a  goodly  portion  of  North  America  as  their 
reward. 

The  course  of  French  exploration,  almost  a  century  later, 
was  determined  very  largely  by  the  fact  that,  as  an  outgrowth 
of  the  discoveries  of  Cartier  and  Champlain,  France  had 
fallen  heir  to  a  string  of  inland  seas,  the  Great  Lakes, 
tapped  by  the  mighty  St.  Lawrence.  Utilizing  this  natural 
advantage,  as  the  Spaniards  had  the  Gulf  of  Mexico,  French 
missionaries  and  traders  found  their  way  into  the  very 
heart  of  the  continent.  They  came  upon  the  great  central 
river  of  North  America  with  its  huge  tributaries,  followed 
the  Father  of  Waters  southward  to  the  Spanish  Gulf  of 
Mexico,  and  established  their  claim  to  the  imperial  inland 
domain  known  as  Louisiana. 

When  the  English  undertook  actively  the  work  of  explor 
ing  and  colonizing  in  North  America,  they  found  themselves 
at  a  serious  disadvantage  since  the  Spaniards  had  pre 
empted  the  lands  to  the  south  and  French  discovery  and 
settlement  were  placing  limits  to  their  expansion  northward 
and  westward.  Only  the  Atlantic  coast  south  of  the  St. 
Lawrence  and  north  of  Florida  seemed  to  offer  them  the 
possibilities  they  desired.  Unfortunately,  as  it  seemed,  the 
great  streams  flowing  into  the  Atlantic,  discovered  or 
claimed  by  the  English,  had  their  origin  in  the  mountain 
ranges  paralleling  the  coast,  and  therefore  no  very  convinc 
ing  claim  could  be  made  by  the  English,  under  the  interna 
tional  law  of  the  time,  to  the  extensive  interior  of  the  con 
tinent.  Even  along  the  Atlantic  seaboard  the  English  found 
interlopers  in  the  Dutch  and  Swedish  settlements,  but  these 
feeble  enterprises  were  summarily  disposed  of  by  conquest. 

In  the  long  run,  the  contracted  dimensions  of  the  area 
settled  by  the  English  proved  to  be  a  blessing  in  disguise. 


32    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

The  vast  spaces  embraced  by  the  Spanish  and  French  de 
pendencies  made  necessary  widely  scattered  settlements,  thin 
populations,  and  the  development  of  hunting,  trading  and 
mining  as  the  chief  occupations  of  the  colonists.  The  con 
sequence  was  a  rapid  exploitation  of  the  country's  super 
ficial  resources  and  the  building  up  of  communities  that  were 
organically  unstable.  The  English  settlers,  on  the  other 
hand,  found  themselves  hemmed  in  on  the  west  by  an  almost 
unbroken  mountain  wall  covered  with  a  heavy  mantle  of 
primeval  forest.  By  a  decree  of  Nature  they  were  confined 
to  a  narrow  strip  of  tidewater  area,  sufficiently  isolated  to 
afford  that  protection  and  cohesion  which  a  well-ordered 
colonial  life  requires,  sufficiently  large  to  permit  of  con 
servative  growth,  and  possessing  that  extended  sea  frontage 
so  necessary  for  the  development  of  a  maritime  people. 

In  the  century  of  conflict  between  the  French  and  the 
English  colonies,  time  was  the  strongest  ally  of  the  English, 
for  time  meant  a  more  compact  population,  greater  material 
resources,  and  a  wider  knowledge  of  the  topography  of  the 
interior.  Massachusetts  and  Virginia  were  longer  estab 
lished  as  colonies  than  the  United  States  is  today  as  a  nation 
before  the  English  had  gained  any  exact  knowledge  of  the 
great  transmontane  empire  that  lay  to  the  west  of  the  Alle- 
ghanies ;  and  their  interest  was  then  provoked  by  the  attempt 
of  the  French  to  enforce  their  claims  to  the  Ohio  valley  by 
a  system  of  stockades  commanding  the  strategic  approaches 
from  the  English  settlements.  In  this  final  great  trial  of 
strength,  the  French  and  Indian  War,  the  English  colonists 
availed  themselves  of  the  geographic  peculiarities  of  their 
situation,  planning  their  campaigns  so  as  to  take  advantage 
of  the  routes  through  the  mountains  of  western  Virginia 
and  Pennsylvania  formed  by  river  and  portage,  and  of  the 
deep  natural  depression  in  the  mountains  formed  by  the 
Hudson-Mohawk  river  system  of  western  New  York. 


GEOGRAPHIC  FACTORS  33 

Handicapped  by  distance  from  their  base  of  operations,  diffi 
culties  of  transportation  and  inferior  numbers,  the  French 
lost  the  war  and,  with  it,  were  forced  to  surrender  their 
empire  in  North  America  by  the  treaty  of 

in 

From  first  to  last,  the  natural  conditions  which  the 
European  settlers  found  in  America  had  a  formative  influ 
ence  on  their  character  and  outl@ek.  This  was  particularly 
true  of  the  English  colonists  who,  unlike  the  Spanish  and 
French,  emigrated  to  the  New  World  without  let  or  hin 
drance  from  the  Crown.  In  the  first  place,  the  precarious 
voyage  across  the  Atlantic  discouraged  all  but  the  stout 
hearted  and  ambitious  from  undertaking  the  adventure. 
Further  than  this,  the  dangers  and  hardships  of  living  in 
the  virgin  wilds  served  to  accentuate  all  the  characteristics 
in  which  the  original  colonists  had  differed  from  their  own 
stock  in  the  Old  World.  The  metamorphosis  that  occurred 
in  the  character  and  mental  make-up  of  the  early  settlers 
marked  the  appearance  of  something  new  in  the  world. 
The  impact  of  frontier  life,  with  its  generous  economic 
opportunities,  upon  the  European  mind  produced  a  complex 
of  reactions  which,  for  lack  of  a  better  term,  we  must  call 
"American." 

From  the  standpoint  of  Englishmen,  the  earliest  Amer 
ican  frontier  was  the  seaboard  itself,  consisting  of  small 
isolated  communities  scattered  along  the  inlets  and  river 
mouths  of  the  extensive  coastline.  As  we  see  it  now,  it 
was,  in  truth,  a  frontier  very  European  in  its  traits  with 
a  society  consciously  modeled  on  European  patterns  and  only 
unconsciously  modified  by  the  changed  conditions  of  the 
American  environment.  By  1700  the  outposts  of  white 
civilization  had  left  the  tidewater  and  made  contact  with 
the  foothills  of  the  Appalachians,  forming  what  may  be 


34    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

called  the  second  American  frontier.  This  new  frontier 
was  as  different  from  the  original  zone  of  settlement  as  the 
latter  had  been  from  Europe ;  and  there  were  quickly  evoked 
those  differences  of  sympathy  and  interest  which  differen 
tiate  newer  settlements  from  old  established  communities. 
By  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century  the  mountains 
themselves  had  been  reached,  and  pioneer  settlement  was 
to  be  found  up  and  down  the  longitudinal  valleys  cutting 
across  colonial  boundaries  in  a  northeasterly  and  south 
westerly  direction. 

The  influence  of  physical  conditions  upon  man  can  no 
place  be  better  studied  than  in  these  successive  frontiers, 
for  there  Nature  held  unmitigated  sway  and  man  was  sub 
jected  to  the  severest  tests.  Cut  off  from  the  conventions 
of  older  communities,  and  tempered  by  the  hazards  and 
difficulties  of  wilderness  life,  men  were  counted  successful 
for  what  they  did,  not  for  what  their  ancestors  may  have 
done.  Like  the  castaways  in  Barrie's  delightful  play  "The 
Admirable  Crichton,"  the  pioneers  forgot  those  artificial  dis 
tinctions  which  had  no  validity  in  the  stark  facts  of  their 
daily  existence;  for,  in  the  presence  of  primeval  Nature,  a 
family  tree  is  infinitely  less  important  than  the  ability  to 
make  a  forest  clearing. 

Such  conditions  were  productive  of  a  race  of  men,  sturdy 
in  their  individualism,  impatient  of  restraint,  and  impetuous 
and  resourceful  in  action.  The  fusing  powers  of  the  back- 
country  were  evidenced  by  the  fact  that  its  population  rep 
resented  a  wide  mingling  of  ethnic  strains,  who  lived  together 
in  harmony  and  shared  the  same  general  outlook  on  life. 
The  character  of  the  pioneer  was  rounded  out  and  sealed  by 
the  economic  conditions  under  which  he  lived :  the  abundance 
of  land  and  the  equality  of  material  possessions.  Such  a 
diffusion  of  property  inevitably  begot  the  ideal  of  political 
democracy. 


GEOGRAPHIC  FACTORS  35 

The  physical  background  of  colonial  life,  however,  was 
not,  in  other  respects,  such  as  to  promote  a  sentiment  of 
unity  among  the  people.  In  each  colony  there  existed  bitter 
political  antagonism  between  the  settlers  of  the  older  and 
those  of  the  newer  frontier  because  of  their  different  needs 
and  aspirations.  While  these  differences  were  chiefly 
economic  in  character,  they  were  deepened  and  perpetuated 
by  the  geographic  aloofness  of  the  two  sections  of  the 
population.  Intercolonial  unity  also  suffered  from  geo 
graphic  conditions.  In  the  seventeenth  century,  colonial 
settlements  were  feeble  and  far  apart,  each  living  in  a 
world  by  itself,  surrounded  by  forests  that  were  difficult 
to  traverse  and  confronted  with  dangers  from  wild  beasts 
and  the  Indians.  Rivers  and  coast  waters  were  the  cus 
tomary  highways  of  travel ;  and,  except  along  certain  beaten 
paths,  few  men  were  venturesome  enough  to  pass  by  land 
from  one  colony  to  another.  Within  its  own  environment 
each  colony  was  engaged  in  working  out  its  own  salvation 
with  little  regard  for  the  others.  Each  had  its  own  problems 
to  solve,  which  absorbed  the  time  and  attention  of  its  people 
and  tended  to  promote  strong  sentiments  of  individualism 
and  particularism. 

These  sentiments  were  strengthened  by  intercolonial 
rivalries,  among  which  boundary  controversies  occupied  a 
large  place.  Boundary  difficulties  began  with  the  granting 
of  charters  to  Maryland  and  Pennsylvania  and  continued 
to  create  friction  among  the  colonies  for  more  than  a  cen 
tury.  Hardly  a  colony  but  had  at  least  one  serious  dispute 
over  boundaries.  Maryland  was  at  odds  with  Virginia  and 
with  Pennsylvania,  New  York  with  Pennsylvania  and  the 
New  England  colonies,  Massachusetts  with  New  Hampshire, 
Rhode  Island  and  Connecticut,  Virginia  with  North  Caro 
lina.  Other  causes  also  contributed  to  intercolonial  misun 
derstanding,  with  the  result  that  the  people  of  one  colony 


36    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

were  inclined  to  look  on  those  of  another  with  distrust  and 
even  dislike.  In  1736  Colonel  William  Byrd  of  Virginia 
wrote  sarcastically  of  the  "Saints  of  New  England"  with 
their  "dexterity  at  palliating  a  perjury  so  well  as  to  leave 
no  taste  of  it  in  the  mouth" ;  and  so  late  as  the  Continental 
Congress  of  1774,  John  Adams,  one  of  the  leading  members, 
had  to  act  cautiously  and  secretly  in  order  to  avoid  arousing 
the  antagonism  of  the  southern  delegates  because  of  his  New 
England  connections. 

These  centrifugal  tendencies  were  eventually  overcome 
only  by  forces  which  broke  down  the  barriers  of  isolation. 
Facilities  of  travel  and  communication  gradually  improved. 
Whereas  the  first  settlers  had  followed  buffalo  tracks  and 
Indian  trails,  ferries  began  to  be  provided,  fords  discovered, 
bridges  built,  morasses  filled  in  or  covered  with  corduroy. 
Within  the  settled  area  of  the  coast,  passable  roads  were 
built,  more  rapidly  in  the  north  than  in  the  south,  although 
it  was  not  until  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century  that  a 
continuous  journey  from  Portsmouth  to  Philadelphia  was 
made  possible.  The  increase  of  population,  and  the  filling 
in  of  the  unoccupied  areas  between  the  settlements,  also  gave 
opportunities  for  more  frequent  intercourse  and  consequent 
understanding. 

Another  mighty  factor  toward  the  promotion  of  inter 
colonial  unity  was  the  migration  and  mingling  of  the  settlers 
of  the  back-country  of  the  several  colonies.  Many  Germans 
of  western  New  York  moved  into  Pennsylvania  and  on  to 
the  mountain  valleys  of  Maryland  and  Virginia.  The 
French  immigrants  occupied  the  hinterland  of  both  South 
Carolina  and  Virginia.  The  Ulstermen  from  Ireland,  who 
came  in  such  huge  numbers,  penetrated  to  the  frontier  dis 
trict  of  New  England,  moved  westward  into  the  backwoods 
of  New  York,  entered  Pennsylvania  by  way  of  Chester 
county,  and  pushed  back  toward  the  center  of  the  province. 


GEOGRAPHIC  FACTORS  37 

From  there  many  went  southward,  following  the  foothills 
into  Maryland  and  Virginia  and  even  going  as  far  as  the 
Waxhaws  of  South  Carolina.  These  wayfarers  brought 
with  them  no  narrow  attachment  to  a  locality  and  became,  in 
a  sense,  the  denizens  of  a  larger  country. 

On  the  foundations  of  this  growing  physical  cohesion  it 
was  possible  to  erect  a  superstructure  of  political  unity. 
When  confronted  with  serious  dangers  from  without,  such 
as  Indian  wars  or  attacks  from  the  French  colonists,  tem 
porary  unions  of  groups  of  colonies  were  formed.  And 
finally,  when  the  colonies  faced  what  they  considered  the 
gravest  menace  of  all,  the  plan  of  the  mother  country  for 
colonial  subordination,  they  were  able  to  act  together  in  the 
Stamp  Act  Congress  (1765)  and,  most  effectively  of  all,  in 
the  First  and  Second  Continental  Congresses  (1774-1781). 

IV 

The  process  by  which  waves  of  humanity  rippled  west 
ward,  paused,  and  began  its  movement  again,  did  not  cease 
with  the  conclusion  of  the  colonial  period,  but  proved  to  be 
a  recurrent  one  which  came  to  rest  only  in  the  closing  years 
of  the  nineteenth  century.  There  has  been  not  one  frontier 
in  American  history  but,  before  the  movement  of  population 
reached  its  final  equipoise,  a  succession  of  frontiers,  each 
hurling  back  its  challenge  to  those  who  dared  to  brave  the 
perils  of  an  unbroken  and  obdurate  wilderness.  Each  time 
a  new  weeding-out  process  occurred,  by  which  the  young  and 
courageous  spirits,  together  with  those  whose  criminal 
conduct  made  them  seek  a  refuge  from  justice,  became 
the  pioneers  of  the  new  zone  of  settlement.  Thus  the 
Americanizing  process  was  a  progressive  one,  each  new 
frontier  producing  a  psychology  and  a  type  of  living  less 
like  the  previous  one  and  more  decidedly  "American"  in  its 
characteristics, 


38    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

Coincident  with  the  winning  of  national  independence,  a 
new  frontier  was  already  beginning  to  be  established  in  the 
Ohio  valley;  and  by  the  opening  years  of  the  nineteenth 
century,  the  vanguard  of  American  settlement  had  reached 
the  Mississippi  river.  The  great  flow  of  population  into 
the  heart  of  the  continent  was  controlled  by  geographic  con 
ditions,  for  the  settlers  naturally  followed  the  lines  of  least 
resistance  offered  by  waterways,  mountain  passes  and  val 
leys.  One  great  stream  of  settlement  passed  through  Cum 
berland  Gap  and  down  the  Kanawha  valley  into  the  Ohio 
river  or,  when  it  was  completed,  followed  the  Cumberland 
road.  In  the  south  picturesque  caravans  of  planters  with 
their  slaves  sought  fresh  tracts  for  cultivation  by  going 
around  the  southern  end  of  the  Appalachian  system  or  by 
directing  their  westward  way  through  mountain  passes  into 
Georgia,  Alabama  and  Tennessee.  New  Englanders  found 
their  natural  passageway  into  the  Middle  West  by  means 
of  the  Mohawk  valley  and  the  Lakes  and,  after  the  Erie 
Canal  was  opened,  they  migrated  in  greatly  increased  num 
bers.  Generally  speaking,  the  currents  of  population  from 
the  older  sections  of  the  country  moved  in  roughly  parallel 
lines  from  their  places  of  origin.  So  great  was  the  move 
ment  of  population  that  eight  territories — Tennessee,  Ken 
tucky,  Ohio,  Indiana,  Illinois,  Missouri,  Mississippi  and 
Alabama — quickly  became  so  populous  that  they  were 
admitted  as  states,  the  last  five  between  the  years  1816  and 
1821. 

As  in  the  case  of  the  colonial  frontiers,  the  problems 
connected  with  conquering  the  wilderness  and  vanquishing 
the  Indian  served  to  cause  a  rebirth  of  American  society 
and  to  rejuvenate  the  spirit  of  American  democracy. 
Society  found  itself  once  more  without  the  conveniences  and 
the  conventions  of  the  older  settled  portions,  and  once  more 
forced  to  find  a  solution  for  such  typical  frontier  problems 


GEOGRAPHIC  FACTORS  39 

as  those  of  transportation  and  communication  with  the  East, 
of  rights  of  land  ownership,  rights  of  self-government  and 
educational  facilities.  One  of  the  significant  contributions 
of  the  Middle  Western  spirit  to  American  history  came  to 
be  a  strong  attachment  to  the  sentiment  of  nationalism.  The 
settlers  were  emigrants  from  all  parts  of  the  United  States 
and  from  many  parts  of  Europe ;  but  the  great  central  * 
valley  of  the  continent  made  them  all  part  of  the  same 
physiographic  province.  Moreover,  they  owed  their  en 
larged  opportunities  to  the  gift  of  the  federal  government; 
and  their  allegiance  went  forth  naturally  to  the  government 
of  all  the  states  rather  than  to  that  of  any  individual  state. 
Their  exultant  nationalism,  their  boastful  speech  and  their 
chauvinistic  spirit,  all  in  harmony  with  the  vast  open  spaces 
in  which  they  dwelt,  made  them  the  butt  of  the  ill-natured 
criticisms  of  Charles  Dickens  and  other  English  travelers, 
who  thought  in  terms  of  the  cramped  dimensions  and  con 
gested  populations  of  Europe  and  failed  to  see  beneath  the 
rugged  exteriors  of  the  western  people.  An  anecdote  told 
by  Alexis  de  Tocqueville,  a  sympathetic  French  observer, 
illustrates  the  boisterous  spirit  of  the  time.  In  a  crowded 
meeting  certain  officials  were  trying  to  force  a  way  through 
to  the  platform.  "Make  way  there,"  they  cried;  "we  are 
the  representatives  of  the  people."  "Make  way  yourselves," 
came  the  quick  retort.  "We  are  the  people."  It  was  the 
young  Warhawks  of  this  western  country,  unaccustomed 
to  parley  in  their  dealings  with  the  Indians  and  impatient 
of  the  cautious  diplomacy  of  the  elder  statesmen  of  the 
seaboard,  who  rushed  the  country  into  the  War  of  1812. 
It  was,  in  large  measure,  the  irrepressible  nationalism  of 
the  Middle  West,  which  led  the  men  of  that  section,  time 
and  again,  to  settle  beyond  the  borders  of  the  United  States, 
and  then  to  embroil  the  government  in  territorial  disputes 
with  the  inevitable  outcome  of  annexation  and  expansion. 


40    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

No  political  leader  ever  raised  the  cry  of  territorial  expan 
sion  without  finding  a  warm-hearted  response  in  this  west, 
whether  the  object  was  Florida,  Louisiana,  Texas  or  Oregon. 
It  may  be  noted,  in  passing,  that  the  star  of  empire  was 
guided  in  its  movements  by  the  law  of  geographic  gravity. 
Every  addition  of  territory  to  the  original  domain  of  1783 
'  was  made  in  response  to  a  desire  to  procure  natural 
boundaries  for  the  area  we  already  possessed.  Jefferson's 
original  interest  in  the  vast  Louisiana  territory  was  merely 
to  secure  American  ownership  of  the  east  bank  of  the 
Mississippi  at  its  mouth  in  order  to  assure  American  control 
of  river  navigation  to  the  Gulf ;  but  the  exigencies  of  Euro 
pean  politics  gave  us  the  whole  hide  in  return  for  our  interest 
in  the  tail.  Even  before  this  transaction  was  completed, 
Senator  Jackson  of  Georgia  announced  in  Congress :  "God 
and  nature  have  destined  New  Orleans  and  the  Floridas 
to  belong  to  this  great  and  rising  Empire."  In  a  geographic 
sense  the  senator  knew  whereof  he  was  speaking.  In  the 
absence  of  a  physical  boundary,  Florida  was  proving  an 
intolerably  bad  neighbor  in  the  hands  of  Spain.  More 
over,  some  important  streams  draining  the  interior  of 
Mississippi,  Alabama  and  Georgia  had  their  ocean  outlets 
in  Spanish  West  Florida.  By  the  treaty  of  1819  all  of  the 
Spanish  territory  east  of  the  Mississippi  river  passed  into 
the  hands  of  the  United  States ;  and  the  national  boundaries 
stood  flush  with  the  Atlantic  and  the  Gulf. 

A  few  years  later  the  sentiment  for  Texas  was  increased, 
in  a  somewhat  similar  fashion,  by  the  feeling  of  Americans 
that  the  Rio  Grande  formed  the  boundary  which  Nature  had 
intended  for  the  United  States  in  the  southwest.  After  the 
annexation  of  Texas,  "Manifest  Destiny"  seemed  to  demand 
the  extension  of  American  suzerainty  to  the  Pacific  ocean, 
though  the  peaks  of  the  Rockies  might  have  been  considered 
a  natural  divide ;  and  soon  came  such  accretions  of  territory 


GEOGRAPHIC  FACTORS  41 

as  Oregon,  California,  and  enough  of  the  interior  country 
to  join  Texas  solidly  with  California.  With  these  additions 
the  continental  mass  of  the  United  States  seemed  to  reach 
an  equilibrium  geographically,  and  no  additions  of  any  im 
portance  have  been  made  from  contiguous  territory  since 
then. 

The  democratic  fervor  which  characterized  the  Middle 
West  was  produced  rather  by  the  equality  of  worldly  posses 
sions  that  prevailed  than  by  the  physical  environment. 
Nevertheless  it  should  be  noted  that  the  physical  hardships 
of  life  on  the  frontier  had  attracted  into  the  Mississippi 
valley  a  type  of  man  naturally  venturesome  and  uncon 
ventional  in  his  outlook  in  life.  Such  men  seemed  predestined 
to  come  to  grips  with  the  new  and  the  untried ;  and  when 
they  came  to  frame  their  new  state  constitutions,  it  seemed 
natural  and  inevitable  that  they  should  defy  the  experience 
of  the  seaboard  states  by  inserting  provisions  for  universal 
manhood  suffrage. 

Geographic  situation  was  an  important  element  in  the 
growth  of  sectionalism  that  occurred  between  1800  and  1860. 
The  prevalence  of  similar  climatic  and  soil  conditions 
throughout  trie  Gulf  states  supplied  the  physical  basis  for 
the  great  cotton-growing  industry  and  consequently  for  the 
attachment  of  the  South  to  the  institution  of  slavery.  The 
great  central  trough  of  North  America,  continental  in  its 
dimensions,  made  the  Northwest  and  the  Southwest  a  part 
of  the  same  physiographic  area  and  foreshadowed  a 
political  combination  of  the  Northwest  and  the  South  which 
should  exclude  New  England  and  the  Middle  Atlantic  states 
from  the  councils  of  the  nation.  If  this  were  to  be  averted, 
it  appeared  that  the  very  face  of  Nature  must  be  altered. 

In  a  resolute  effort  to  accomplish  this,  Henry  Clay  advo 
cated  the  construction  of  internal  improvements  at  national 
expense,  planning  by  this  means  to  vanquish  the  Alleghany 


42    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

barricade  and  join  the  seaboard  North  and  the  Northwest 
through  frequent  intercourse  and  economic  exchanges.  His 
policy  never  won  complete  acceptance  by  Congress ;  but  the 
efforts  of  the  federal  government  were  ably  supplemented 
by  the  appropriations  of  New  York  and  other  states  for 
canals  and  highways.  The  union  of  the  two  northern  sec 
tions  was  finally  accomplished  by  the  construction  of  rail 
roads  in  the  forties  and  the  fifties.  Thus  the  North  rose 
superior  to  natural  obstacles ;  and,  partly  due  to  this  fact,  it 
was  able  to  present  a  united  front  to  the  South  in  1860. 

The  campaigns  of  the  Civil  War,  like  those  of  every  other 
war  in  which  the  United  States  has  taken  part,  were  deter 
mined,  to  a  very  great  extent,  by  physiographic  considera 
tions.  The  subject  is  too  large  for  treatment  here.  The 
great  strategic  objectives  of  the  armies  of  both  sides  were 
mountain  passes,  railroad  centers,  and  the  control  of  the 
waterways.  The  tremendous  importance  of  rivers  in  the 
conduct  of  the  war  is  reflected  in  the  names  of  the  Union 
armies :  the  Army  of  the  Potomac,  the  Army  of  the  James, 
the  Army  of  the  Cumberland  and  the  Army  of  the  Ten 
nessee.  Although  railroads  were  more  important  than  in 
any  previous  war,  the  lengthening  lines  of  communication 
of  the  advancing  federal  forces  made  rivers  more  effective 
routes  than  the  iron  highways  which  could  be  easily  destroyed 
by  enemy  raiders. 


Before  1860  the  frontier  had  already  passed  beyond  the 
Mississippi  river  to  the  margin  of  the  arid  belt  and,  leaping 
the  Great  Plains  and  the  Rockies,  had  firmly  established 
itself  on  the  Pacific  seaboard.  By  1890  the  last  of  the  fertile 
public  lands  had  been  transferred  to  private  owners  and 
the  frontier,  in  an  official  sense,  disappeared,  although  the 
last  two  territories  of  the  Far  West,  New  Mexico  and 


GEOGRAPHIC  FACTORS  43 

Arizona,  were  not  admitted  into  the  Union  until  1912. 
Perhaps  the  most  remarkable  feature  of  this  last  continental 
wilderness  of  the  United  States  was  the  unprecedented  speed 
with  which  it  was  peopled.  The  age  of  steam  and  steel  had 
arrived;  and  a  few  tons  of  coal  applied  to  rail  locomotion 
conquered  distances  and  physical  barriers  in  this  new  age  that 
would  have  halted  the  progress  of  settlement  for  many  years 
in  the  earlier  stages  of  American  history. 

The  rapid  subjugation  of  the  trans-Mississippi  frontier 
created  vexatious  industrial  and  social  problems,  new  in 
degree  and  form  but  old  as  the  frontier  itself  in  kind.  These 
problems  grew  out  of  the  distance  of  the  western  producer 
from  the  market,  the  excessive  cost  of  transportation,  the 
consequent  high  prices  of  manufactured  articles,  and  the 
low  prices  received  for  farm  products.  These  conditions, 
partly  geographic  in  origin,  formed  the  substratum  of  a 
period  of  agrarian  unrest  which  found  successive  manifesta 
tion  in  the  Granger  movement,  the  greenback  agitation,  the 
movement  for  "free  silver,"  and  the  more  recent  agitation 
against  monopolies  and  "Big  Business." 

The  contact  of  American  society  at  its  fringes  with  con 
ditions  of  primitive  democracy  gave  a  fresh  impulse  to  the 
development  of  American  equalitarian  thought  and  practice. 
The  thinly  populated  frontier  states  and  communities  served 
anew  their  function  as  laboratories  of  political  experiment 
and  social  adaptation,  making  their  greatest  contribution  to 
modern  American  democracy  in  the  origination  of  the 
doctrine  of  equal  suffrage  regardless  of  sex.  Out  of  these 
states,  also,  came  many  new  political  devices  designed  to 
insure  the  control  of  the  people  over  their  government,  such 
as  direct  nominations,  the  initiative  and  referendum,  the 
recall,  and  the  popular  election  of  United  States  senators. 

The  passing  of  the  frontier  has  had  important  economic 
consequences,  for  with  the  exhaustion  of  this  great  public- 


44    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

land  reservoir  the  poor  man  can  no  longer  receive  a  helping 
hand  from  the  government  to  make  a  new  start  in  life. 
Hardly  less  important  is  the  fact  that  throughout  American 
history  the  frontier  has  served  as  the  zone  of  most  rapid 
and  thorough  Americanization.  In  the  crucible  of  the  fron 
tier  men  of  all  races  were  melted  down  and  fused  into  a 
new  race,  English  in  speech  but  ^American  in  nationality. 
Therein  lay  the  secret  of  the  "melting  pot,"  which  has  con 
stituted  one  of  the  marvels  of  modern  times.  Under  the 
new  conditions  the  imperative  problem  is  to  furnish  a  sub 
stitute  to  perform  the  work  which  the  frontier  accomplished 
for  us,  and  in  spite  of  us,  in  the  past.  The  present-day 
Americanization  movement,  in  its  various  aspects,  is  a 
groping  toward  a  solution  of  this  difficulty.  Whether  the 
answer  be  found  in  new  restrictions  on  immigration  or  a 
broader  program  of  education,  no  question  of  our  time 
merits  more  serious  consideration  and  honest  thought. 

In  all  probability  the  influence  of  natural  conditions  on 
American  national  development  will  be  less  important  in 
the  future  than  it  has  been  in  the  past.  The  age  of  steam 
and  electricity  has  neutralized  many  of  the  effects  which 
proved  vital  determinants  of  political  and  social  progress 
in  the  past.  Mountains  have  been  conquered  by  the  railroad 
and  the  telegraph ;  unproductive  soils  have  yielded  to  irriga 
tion  and  fertilization;  rivers  have  been  rendered  navigable 
and  their  courses  changed.  The  long  contest  between  man 
and  Nature  in  America  has  been  decided  in  favor  of  man; 
and  for  the  future,  man  seems  determined  to  create  the 
kind  of  physical  environment  which  is  best  adapted  to  his 
fullest  development. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

The  publication  of  the  History  o/  Civilization  in  England  (2  v.; 
London,  1857-1861)  by  the  English  historian,  Henry  Thomas  Buckle, 
did  much  to  open  the  eyes  of  historians  all  over  the  world  to  the 


GEOGRAPHIC  FACTORS  45 

vital  relationship  between  natural  conditions  and  human  develop 
ment.  A  generation  passed  before  students  of  American  history 
made  any  constructive  application  of  Buckle's  ideas.  The  first 
systematic  attempt  to  apply  a  geographic  interpretation  to  American 
history  was  made  by  Nathaniel  Southgate  Shaler,  who  in  1884  con 
tributed  a  brief  section  on  "Physiography  of  North  America"  to 
Justin  Winsor's  Narrative  and  Critical  History  of  America  (8  v. ; 
Boston,  1884-1889),  vol.  iv,  pp.  i-xxx,  and  later  elaborated  his  ideas 
in  his  book  entitled  Nature  and  Man  in  America  (New  York,  1891). 
Approaching  the  subject  from  the  standpoint  of  a  geologist,  he  first 
traced  in  this  volume  the  effects  of  terrestrial  changes  upon  the 
fauna  and  flora  of  North  America,  and  then  devoted  several  notable 
chapters  (vi-viii)  to  setting  forth,  in  a  large  way,  the  influence  of 
'geographic  variations  upon  the  history  of  man  in  America  from 
pre-Columbian  days  to  the  present. 

In  1892  the  Englishman  Edward  John  Payne  published  the  first 
volume  of  his  notable  work,  History  of  the  New  World  Called 
America  (2  v. ;  Oxford,  1892-1899).  This  work,  which  has  never 
been  completed,  sought  to  explain  the  conditions  of  life  among  the 
American  aborigines  as  the  result  of  natural  conditions,  especially 
the  nature  of  the  food  supply  and  the  lack  of  useful  domestic 
animals. 

In  1893  Frederick  Jackson  Turner  read  his  epoch-making  address 
to  the  American  Historical  Association  on  "The  Significance  of  the 
Frontier  in  American  History,"  later  published  in  the  Annual  Report 
of  the  American  Historical  Association  for  1893,  pp.  197-227,  and 
also  in  his  The  Frontier  in  American  History  (New  York,  1920), 
pp.  1-38.  Professor  Turner's  thesis,  that  "The  existence  of  free 
land,  the  continuous  recession,  the  advance  of  American  settlement 
westward  explain  American  development,"  is  almost  too  well  known 
to  require  re-statement  here.  Although  Professor  Turner  phrased 
his  thought  in  this  and  his  other  studies  very  largely  in  the 
terminology  of  the  physiographer,  the  frontier  is  to  him  "a  form  of 
society  rather  than  an  area/'  and  his  chief  importance  to  American 
historical  thinking  has,  in  last  analysis,  been  his  elucidation  of  the 
part  played  by  economic  group  conflicts  in  our  history.  See  pp. 
69-70  of  the  present  volume. 

The  fullest  statements  we  have  of  the  importance  of  physical 
influences  in  American  history  appeared  in  two  books,  published  in 
1903,  which  had  been  worked  out  independently  of  each  other. 
Albert  Perry  Brigham's  Geographic  Influences  in  American  History 
(Boston)  marked  no  important  advance  beyond  what  Professor 
Shaler  had  set  forth  in  1891.  Ellen  Churchill  Semple's  American 
History  and  its  Geographic  Conditions  (Boston),  couched  in  English 
of  unusual  charm,  continues  to  be  the  best  manual  that  has  been 
written  on  the  subject. 

A  number  of  monographic  studies  along  the  lines  suggested  by 
these  works  have  been  carried  out  since  1903.  A  notable  series  has 
been  written  by  Archer  Butler  Hulbert  under  the  general  title 
Historic  Highways  of  America  (16  v. ;  Cleveland,  1902-1905). 
In  1907  a  notable  Conference  on  the  Relation  of  Geography  to 


46    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

History,  presided  over  by  Professor  Turner,  was  held  in  con 
junction  with  the  meeting  of  the  American  Historical  Association 
at  Madison,  The  principal  papers  were  presented  by  Miss  Semple 
and  Qrin  Grant  Libby.  See  report  of  this  conference  in  the 
Bulletin  of  the  American  Geographic  Society,  vol.  xl,  pp.  1-17. 

Students  interested  in  this  field  should  be  acquainted  with 
Professor  Hulbert's  article  entitled,  "The  Increasing  Debt  of  His 
tory  to  Science"  in  the  Proceedings  of  the  American  Antiquarian 
Society,  vol.  xxix  (1919),  pp.  29-42,  wherein  he  summarizes  the 
results  that  have  been  achieved  from  the  application  of  a  physio- 
graphical  explanation  to  American  history  and  suggests  that  fur 
ther  clarification  might  be  brought  about  by  utilizing  the  information 
made  available  by  the  climatologist,  botanist,  geologist,  ornitholo 
gist  and  hydrographer.  Teachers  of  American  history  should  be 
familiar  with  Dixon  Ryan  Fox's  essay,  "American  History  and 
the  Map,"  introducing  his  carefully-prepared  map  studies  in 
Harper's  Atlas  of  American  History  (New  York,  1920). 


CHAPTER  III 

ECONOMIC  INFLUENCES  IN  AMERICAN   HISTORY 


By  the  term  "economic  interpretation  of  history"  is  meant 
that  view  of  the  past  which  maintains  that  economic  influ 
ences  have  been  the  preponderant  factors  in  the  history  of 
mankind.  Although  traces  of  this  theory  may  be  found  in 
writings  prior  to  his  time,  Karl  Marx,  the  father  of  modern 
Socialism,  is  rightly  regarded  as  the  great  formulator  of 
the  doctrine.  Undoubtedly  the  association  of  Marx's  name 
with  the  theory  of  economic  determinism  has  caused  many 
people  to  regard  this  point  of  view  with  considerable  distrust ; 
and  even  the  historians,  particularly  those  in  the  United 
States,  have  been  cautious  about  admitting  themselves  to  be 
adherents  of  the  doctrine.  During  the  excitement  of  the 
World  War,  the  avowal  by  a  New  York  school  teacher  of 
his  belief  in  the  economic  interpretation  of  history  was 
regarded  by  certain  members  of  the  Board  of  Education 
as  sufficient  grounds  for  his  expulsion.  Perhaps  the  feel 
ing  of  the  ordinary  man  is  best  expressed  by  the  witticism 
of  a  learned  historian  in  an  address  delivered  before  the 
American  Historical  Association,  to  the  effect  that  the 
members  of  this  school  of  historical  interpretation  were 
responsible  for  putting  the  "hiss"  into  history. 

As  a  matter  of  fact  there  is  no  necessary  connection 
between  a  belief  in  the  predominance  of  economic  influences 
in  history  and  the  doctrine  of  Socialism.  Most  historians 
who  have  subscribed  to  the  former  view  are  not  Socialists; 

47 


48    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

and,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  probable  that  few  Socialists 
outside  of  the  small  circle  of  the  intelligentsia  know  any 
thing  about  this  special  theory  of  historical  development. 
•  The  economic  interpretation  of  history  merely  represents 
an  effort  to  explain,  from  the  viewpoint  of  economic  ten 
dencies,  the  deep-flowing  currents  moving  underneath  the 
surface  of  the  past.  Socialism,  on  the  other  hand,  is  a 
prediction,  one  of  a  number  of  possible  predictions,  as  to 
the  direction,  velocity,  and  goal  of  these  currents  at  some 
time  in  the  future. 

Because  of  the  popular  confusion  of  the  theory  of 
economic  determinism  with  Socialism,  the  student  of 
American  history  may  prefer  to  ignore  the  Marxian  origin 
of  the  doctrine  and  claim  for  it  an  earlier  and  purely  Amer 
ican  authorship.  Certainly  the  thought  underlying  the 
theory  has  seldom  been  better  expressed  than  by  James 
Madison,  the  "Father  of  the  Constitution,"  in  No.  10  of 
the  Federalist  Papers,  which  were  written  in  1787  and 
1788  to  win  popular  support  for  the  federal  Constitution 
then  pending  before  the  state  ratifying  conventions.  After 
pointing  out  that  mankind  has  constantly  been  influenced 
and  divided  by  differences  over  religion  and  government  or 
by  attachment  to  outstanding  leaders,  Madison  added :  "But 
the  most  common  and  durable  source  of  factions  has  been 
the  various  and  unequal  distribution  of  property.  Those 
who  hold  and  those  who  are  without  property  have  ever 
formed  distinct  interests  in  society.  Those  who  are 
creditors,  and  those  who  are  debtors,  fall  under  a  like 
discrimination.  A  landed  interest,  a  manufacturing  interest, 
a  mercantile  interest,  a  moneyed  interest,  with  many  lesser 
interests,  grow  up  of  necessity  in  civilized  nations,  and 
divide  them  into  different  classes,  actuated  by  different  senti 
ments  and  views."  Here  is  an  explicit  avowal  that,  in  the 
Jong  run,  history  ]§  the  resultant  of  the  interplay  of  social 


ECONOMIC  INFLUENCES  49 

energies  produced  by  differences  in  the  amount  and  kind 
of  material  possessions  held  by  the  several  sections  of  the 
population. 

In  attempting  to  apply  the  principle  of  economic  inter 
pretation  to  American  history,  one  is  at  once  confronted  with 
the  necessity  of  distinguishing  between  geographic  or 
environmental  influences,  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  purely 
economic  basis  of  American  development,  on  the  other. 
The  fact  is  that  trie  two  classes  of  influences  are  sometimes 
so  blended  that  it  is  impossible,  or  at  least  undesirable,  to 
separate  them.  As  has  already  been  pointed  out  in  this 
volume,  the  geographic  background  of  history  includes  such 
elements  as  the  contour  of  the  earth's  surface,  the  dis 
tribution  of  land  and  water,  relationships  of  the  size  and 
distance  of  natural  objects  and,  in  the  larger  meaning  of 
the  term,  climatic  conditions.  Economic  influences  arise 
from  the  possession  of  property  by  man,  or  from  the  desire 
for  such  possession,  or  from  the  use  of  such  property  as  a 
lever  of  political  or  social  power.  A  mountain  range  might, 
as  a  geographic  condition,  obstruct  the  movement  of  popula 
tion;  with  the  discovery  of  gold,  it  becomes  an  economic 
influence  which  draws  people  irresistibly. 

ii 

Historians  have  generally  treated  the  discovery  of 
America  as  being  the  inevitable  outcome  of  the  economic 
plight  in  which  Europe  found  herself  because  of  the  block 
ing  of  the  Oriental  trade  routes  by  the  Turks  after  the  fall 
of  Constantinople  in  1453.  That  view  now  requires  cor 
rection,  for  Professor  Lybyer  has  shown,  from  a  study  of 
contemporary  documents  and  of  the  curve  of  prices  of 
Oriental  commodities  in  Europe,  that  the  main  routes  of 
Oriental  trade  through  the  Levant  were  not  obstructed  by 
the  Turks  until  some  years  after  Columbus's  voyage  of  dis- 


50    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

covery.  While  this  revelation  disposes  of  the  traditional 
view,  it  also  serves  to  bring  into  sharper  relief  tjhe  commercial 
rivalry  of  the  Atlantic  countries,  Portugal  and  Spain,  as  a 
factor  in  the  situation. 

The  merchants  of  the  Mediterranean  cities,  Genoa  and 
Venice,  had  been  the  chief  beneficiaries  of  the  old  routes 
of  trade;  these  cities  had  waxed  wealthy  as  termini  and 
distributing  centers  of  Far  Eastern  commerce.  The  aspiring 
monarchs  on  the  Atlantic  saw  an  opportunity  to  seize  this 
trade,  with  all  the  profits  accruing  therefrom,  if  they  could 
discover  a  water-passage  to  the  Orient  by  way  of  the 
Atlantic.  Thus  Portugal,  after  some  experimental  voyages 
of  discovery,  put  forth  heroic  efforts  in  the  quest  of  a  pas 
sage  around  Africa,  finally  achieving  her  goal  in  the  voyage 
of  Vasco  da  Gama  in  1498;  and  the  Spanish  Court,  with 
grave  misgivings,  backed  the  scheme  of  the  Italian  visionary, 
Cristoforo  Colombo,  for  a  due  western  passage.  In  view 
of  the  opposition  of  economic  interests  involved,  it  is  not 
surprising  that  Columbus  should  have  been  forced  to  leave 
Genoa  in  order  to  obtain  assistance  for  a  venture  which 
promised  the  commercial  eclipse  of  his  native  city.  Had 
Columbus  not  appeared  on  the  scene  at  the  psychological 
time,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that,  with  the  economic  situation 
as  it  was,  the  discovery  would  have  been  made  at  about  the 
same  time  by  some  other  mariner.  Indeed,  there  is  absolute 
proof  of  this  conjecture  in  the  fact  that  the  coast  of  Brazil 
was  accidentally  discovered  in  the  year  1500  by  a  Portuguese 
captain  who  was  blown  out  of  his  course  by  unfavorable 
winds  while  attempting  to  follow  Vasco  da  Gama's  route 
around  Africa. 

The  economic  motive  played  a  large  part  in  the  coloniza 
tion  of  the  New  World.  The  main  incentive  to  the  estab 
lishment  of  colonies  was  the  desire  of  European  monarchs 
to  secure  new  sources  of  national  revenue,  to  which  must 


ECONOMIC  INFLUENCES  51 

be  added,  in  the  case  of  the  English  colonists,  the  desire  of 
the  settlers  to  improve  their  living  conditions.  Spain  was 
richly  rewarded  with  great  stores  of  gold  and  silver.  The 
French  and  the  Dutch  found  the  fur  trade  a  never-ending 
source  of  wealth.  In  the  case  of  the  English  colonists,  as 
Professor  Andrews  has  pointed  out,  the  first  efforts  at 
planting  colonies,  made  by  romantic  Elizabethan  adventurers, 
were  failures ;  and  the  beginnings  of  effective  colonization 
grew  out  of  the  commercial  ambitions  of  noblemen,  mer 
chants  and  capitalists  in  the  Stuart  period.  They  saw  in 
the  New  World  great  opportunities  for  wealth,  such  as 
earlier  Englishmen  had  seen  in  the  Mediterranean  and  the 
Baltic.  With  few  exceptions  the  British  colonies  in  North 
America  were  founded  as  business  ventures ;  and  even 
where  the  original  motive  was  religious  or  philanthropic, 
there  was,  in  most  instances,  also  a  commercial  aspect. 

Two  forms  of  promoting  colonization  were  widely  em 
ployed  by  the  English :  the  trading  company,  and  the  pro 
prietary  grant.  The  trading  company  differed  in  no  essential 
respect  from  a  modern  business  corporation.  The  money 
necessary  for  fitting  out  a  colonial  expedition — for  trans 
porting  settlers  and  providing  their  food  and  clothing  and 
implements  during  the  initial  years — was  obtained  through 
the  sale  of  stock;  and  the  stockholders  expected  dividends 
on  their  investment  in  the  shape  of  furs  or  some  agricultural 
or  mineral  product  that  could  be  marketed  in  Europe. 
Fortunately,  these  companies  proved  unsuccessful  financially 
in  Virginia  and  elsewhere ;  otherwise  the  English  settlements 
might  not  have  developed  beyond  mere  trading  posts.  The 
proprietary  grant,  on  the  other  hand,  was  feudal  in  character. 
The  proprietor  to  whom  the  land  had  been  granted  undertook 
the  planting  of  a  colony  as  one  might  set  about  the  cultivation 
of  a  distant  estate.  He  met  the  expenses  of  shiploads  of 
laborers  sent  out  to  develop  its  resources,  and  expected  re- 


52    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

turns  on  his  investment  from  the  rental  and  sale  of  lands, 
tariff  duties,  and  receipts  from  mines. 

While  the  latter  scheme  was  more  profitable  to  the  pro 
moters  than  the  trading  corporation  (as  witness  the  instances 
of  Pennsylvania  and  Maryland),  the  historical  importance 
of  both  forms  of  colonial  promotion  lay  in  the  fact  that  they 
mapped  out  domains,  and  paved  the  way,  for  a  spontaneous 
migration  of  Europeans  who  were  animated,  first  and  fore 
most,  by  the  prospect  of  their  personal  material  betterment, 
Indeed,  the  original  backers  of  colonization  projects  became 
discouraged  as  to  their  financial  returns  after  a  generation, 
in  the  case  of  most  of  the  colonies ;  and  the  stockholders 
and  heirs  of  the  original  grants  were  generally  willing  to  sell 
out  their  rights  to  the  Crown  for  a  modest  remuneration. 
One  of  the  significant  movements  of  the  colonial  period  was 
the  transition  of  most  of  the  thirteen  colonies  from  their 
original  condition  of  private  ownership  and  control  to  royal 
provinces  possessing  representative  government.  This  trend 
was  conditioned,  in  large  degree,  by  the  desire  of  both  the 
English  government  and  the  colonials  to  participate  in  the 
vested  interests  possessed  by  the  original  promoters  and 
enterprisers. 

The  history  of  each  one  of  the  English  colonies  was 
marked  by  political  antagonism  between  the  people  living  in 
the  coast  towns  and  the  settlers  of  the  interior.  Racial  and 
religious  differences,  and  intervening  distance,  contributed 
to  this  antipathy;  but  the  real  contention  between  tidewater 
and  back-country  was  an  economic  one.  The  men  of  the 
cities  were  merchants  and  capitalists,  and  the  people  of  the 
backwoods,  possessed  of  slender  means,  were  generally  in 
debt  to  them.  This  tended  to  divide  the  population  of  each 
colony  on  all  questions  of  public  policy  arising  in  the  pro 
vincial  legislature,  especially  those  involving  the  economic 
welfare  of  the  one  group  or  the  other.  Moreover,  the  people 


ECONOMIC  INFLUENCES  53 

of  the  interior  were  likely  to  be  radical  democrats,  for  on 
the  frontier  the  small  farm  was  the  unit  of  economic  life, 
and  the  terms  of  virtual  economic  equality  on  which  the 
people  lived  taught  them  to  believe  that  all  men  were  entitled 
to  equal  treatment  politically. 

Two  of  the  prolific  causes  of  contention  in  the  domestic 
politics  of  the  colonies  had  to  do  with  fiat  money  and  the 
apportionment  of  taxes.  The  back-county  where  specie  was 
scarce  had  greater  need  of  paper  currency  than  did  the 
creditor  and  merchant  class  living  in  the  older  settlements; 
and  the  eastern  members  of  the  legislature  endeavored  to 
prevent  that  body  from  granting  any  relief.  Likewise  in 
the  matter  of  taxation  the  inland  farmers  believed  that  they 
were  being  discriminated  against  by  their  tidewater  brethren 
and  forced  to  raise  an  undue  proportion  of  the  public  reve 
nues.  In  such  contests  the  older  settlements,  even  when 
numerically  inferior,  were  usually  able  to  maintain  the  upper 
hand  because  of  the  system  of  apportionment  whereby  they 
were  over-represented  in  the  colonial  legislature.  When 
the  inequities  of  their  situation  became  unendurable,  the 
frontiersmen  did  not  hesitate  to  take  up  arms  in  vindication 
of  their  rights.  Some  notable  examples  of  this  are  to  be 
found  in  Bacon's  rebellion  in  Virginia,  the  Regulators'  up 
rising  in  North  Carolina  in  1770  and,  during  the  Confedera 
tion  period,  Shays'  rebellion  in  Massachusetts.  ^ 

The  prosperity  and  progress  of  the  colonies  depended  upon 
their  commercial  connections  with  the  rest  of  the  world. 
As  newly-settled  farming  and  fishing  communities,  they  could 
not  with  any  wisdom  develop  their  own  manufactures,  nor 
could  they  find  a  market  for  their  surplus  products  without 
access  to  British  or  foreign  markets.  But  they  were  under 
the  wing  of  the  greatest  manufacturing  and  commercial 
nation  of  the  earth ;  and  in  the  world  as  it  then  was,  fenced 
off  into  exclusive  trading  monopolies,  this  connection  with 


54    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

England  undoubtedly  redounded  to  the  economic  advantage 
of  the  colonies.  Recent  researches  have  shown  that,  con 
trary  to  a  long-held  opinion,  the  colonists  suffered  no  real 
hardship  from  the  regulation  of  their  commerce  and  industry 
by  Parliament  prior  to  1763  and,  indeed,  that  they  enjoyed 
some  substantial  benefits  in  the  subsidizing  of  certain  indus 
tries  (like  indigo  culture  and  timber  production)  and  in  the 
protection  against  foreign  competition  extended  to  ship 
building.  There  is  no  reason  to  believe  that  the  people 
during  most  of  the  colonial  period  were  not  as  contented 
under  British  rule  as  the  people  of  Canada  are  today.  But 
a  radical  change  in  British  colonial  policy  about  1763  threat 
ened  the  economic  welfare  of  the  colonists  and  created  such 
widespread  protest  and  unrest  in  America  that  within  a  dozen 
years  the  colonists  were  engaged  in  launching  a  war  for 
separation.  As  this  matter  is  discussed  at  some  length  in 
a  later  chapter,  nothing  further  need  be  said  here  about  it.1 
The  winning  of  independence  brought  with  it  a  loss  of 
the  commercial  advantages  which  the  colonists  had  enjoyed 
by  reason  of  their  membership  in  the  British  Empire.  Since 
the  federal  government  established  under  the  Articles  of 
Confederation  lacked  the  power  and  energy  to  place  Amer 
ican  business  and  commerce  upon  a  stable  footing,  men  of 
substance  and  national  vision  began  a  campaign  of  agitation 
for  replacing  the  existing  government  with  a  new  one  pos 
sessing  authority  to  protect  property  rights,  and  to  establish 
national  credit  at  home  and  abroad.  "I  conceive,  sir,"  de 
clared  Fisher  Ames  of  Massachusetts,  "that  the  present 
Constitution  was  dictated  by  commercial  necessity  more  than 
any  other  cause."  2  After  the  new  government  was  once 
established  under  the  Constitution,  the  efforts  of  our  diplo 
macy  were  very  largely  motivated  by  economic  considera- 

1  Chapter  vii. 

•The  economic  phases  of  the  movement  for  the  federal  Constitution  are  dis- 
Cussed  in  some  detail  in  chapter  viii, 


ECONOMIC  INFLUENCES  55 

tions:  the  desire  to  recover  old  markets  or  to  acquire  new 
ones  for  our  commerce,  and  the  necessity  of  protecting  our 
neutral  trade  from  the  encroachments  of  Great  Britain  and 
France  during  the  Napoleonic  wars.  A  notable  series  of 
treaties  testify  to  the  degree  of  success  attained  by  these 
efforts. 

in 

The  political  history  of  the  United  States  affords  abundant 
evidence  of  the  direct  relationship  between  self-conscious 
economic  groups  in  the  population  and  political  parties. 
Many  illustrations  might  be  cited ;  but,  for  present  purposes, 
the  original  alignment  of  parties  between  Federalists  and 
Republicans  in  the  first  quarter  of  a  century  under  the 
Constitution  will  suffice.  The  Federalists  were,  in  the  main, 
the  same  group  who  had  carried  the  movement  for  the 
Constitution  against  heavy  odds;  they  were  interested  in 
translating  into  effective  statutes  those  clauses  of  that  instru 
ment  which  promised  the  establishment  of  the  national  credit, 
the  security  of  property  and  contracts,  and  the  protection  of 
commerce  and  manufactures.  In  other  words,  the  effective 
nucleus  of  the  Federalist  party  consisted  of  merchants, 
money-lenders  and  capitalists. 

Alexander  Hamilton's  monumental  financial  plan,  pro 
viding  for  the  funding  of  the  debt,  assumption  of  the  state 
debts,  a  United  States  Bank,  etc.,  reduced  their  ideas  to  a 
definite  code,  and  undoubtedly  served  to  anchor  the  young 
republic  at  a  time  when  blustering  winds  threatened  to  drive 
it  on  the  rocks.  And  it  is  to  be  noted  that  while  Hamilton 
used  the  nation  to  buttress  wealth,  he  also  reversed  the 
process  and  used  wealth  to  buttress  the  nation.  This  is  no 
where  shown  better  than  in  his  project  to  have  the  debts 
contracted  by  the  states  during  the  Revolutionary  War  paid 
off,  or  assumed,  by  the  federal  government,  an  object  which, 


56    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

it  may  be  noted,  he  attained  only  by  means  of  a  political  deal 
with  his  enemy,  Thomas  Jefferson,  whereby  he  agreed  to  a 
Potomac  site  for  the  national  capital  in  return  for  southern 
votes  for  assumption.  By  this  assumption  measure  Hamil 
ton  aimed  to  consolidate  behind  the  new  national  government 
the  support  of  all  the  men  who  in  past  years  had  invested 
their  money  in  the  securities  of  the  state  governments.  The 
measure  formed,  in  the  language  of  Henry  Cabot  Lodge,  an 
important  link  in  Hamilton's  system  "to  create  a  strong 
and  .  .  .  permanent  class  all  over  the  country,  without 
regard  to  existing  political  affiliations,  but  bound  to  the 
government  as  a  government,  by  the  strongest  of  all  ties, 
immediate  and  personal  pecuniary  interest." 

Since  the  merchant  and  moneyed  class  formed  only  a  small 
minority  of  the  population,  we  find  in  this  circumstance  the 
economic  basis  for  the  philosophical  and  constitutional  doc 
trines  of  the  Federalist  party.  In  order  to  protect  their 
peculiar  economic  interests  in  the  presence  of  an  overwhelm 
ingly  agricultural  population,  they  became  strong  exponents 
of  the^aristocratic  ideal  JD£  government — government  Jj>y_jthe, 
few  or  the  ^well-born.  Their  economic  situation  further 
necessitated  a  belief  in  a  government  strongly  centralized  and 
made  of  them  upholders  of  a  broad  construction  of  the 
Constitution  and  of  a  military  establishment.  Likewise  their 
foreign  policy  was  susceptible  of  an  economic  explanation. 
Toward  Great  Britain  they  were  consistently  friendly,  even 
to  the  point  of  agreeing  to  such  an  unfavorable  treaty  as 
the  Jay  treaty  of  1794,  for  in  the  establishment  of  closer 
relations  with  Great  Britain  lay  their  great  hope  of  recover 
ing  their  commercial  prosperity.  For  France  the  Federalists 
felt  only  distrust  and  hostility,  for  that  country  since  1789 
had  become  the  abode  of  social  unrest  and  doctrinaire 
radicalism. 

On  the  other  side  of  the  political  fence,  the  JefTersonian 


ECONOMIC  INFLUENCES  57 

Republicans  as  faithfully  represented  the  interests  and  aspi 
rations  of  their  rural  constituency.  The  abundance  of  good 
farm  land  and  the  consequent  ease  of  acquiring  a  livelihood 
relieved  the  farmers  and  planters  of  the  need  of  govern 
mental  tariffs  and  other  financial  assistance  in  their  economic 
life,  and  caused  them  to  envisage  government  merely  as  a 
sublimated  policeman  whose  sole  function  was  to  preserve 
peace  and  good  order.  Hamilton's  ingenious  scheme  of  a 
national  bank,  tariff  system,  and  complete  financial  reorgan 
ization  seemed  to  them  pure  class  legislation,  officious  intru 
sions  into  a  domain  of  interests  wherein  private  citizens 
could  best  work  out  their  own  salvation.  As  they  watched 
the  Federalists  at  work,  they  became  embittered  against  a 
government  which  appeared  to  be  working  in  the  interests 
of  a  strongly-organized  minority ;  they  devised  a  doctrine  of 
state  rights  as  their  strongest  bulwark  against  federal  en 
croachments;  and,  confident  in  their  numerical  superiority, 
they  exalted  democracy — control  by  the  majority — as  the 
only  proper  government  for  a  free  people.  Their  attacks 
on  the  entrenched  moneyed  interests  brought  to  their  sup 
port  the  workingmen  of  the  towns,  as  yet  an  unimportant 
though  growing  element  of  the  population.  Without  the 
prestige  of  Washington  and  the  disorganized  state  of  the 
opposition  party,  it  is  doubtful  if  the  Federalists  could  have 
retained  power  as  long  as  they  did.  With  his  death  they 
quickly  succumbed  to  the  democratic  tide  and  passed  out  of 
power  forever. 

It  seems  unnecessary  to  dwell  further  in  any  detailed  way 
upon  the  relation  between  political  parties  and  economic 
group  conflicts.  In  a  general  way,  the  National  Republicans 
of  1828,  the  dominant  element  in  the  Whig  party,  and  the 
post  bellum  Republicans  have  in  turn  represented  the  inter 
ests  of  the  manufacturing  and  financial  class.  The  economic 
basis  of  the  Democratic  party  has  been  more  complicated  in 


58    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

character  but,  except  for  a  period  of  about  twenty  years 
before  the  Civil  War,  the  Democrats  have  generally  repre 
sented  the  interests  of  poorer  and  less  fortunate  classes  of 
society. 

IV 

The  political  events  of  the  "Middle  Period"  of  American 
history  (1800-1860)  find  their  explanation  very  largely  in  the 
sectionalization  of  American  life  which,  during  this  period, 
divided  the  nation  into  three  distinct  economic  areas,  a  broad 
western  zone  of  independent  small  farmers,  a  northern  sea 
board  section  in  which  manufacturing  was  becoming  the 
dominant  interest,  and  a  southern  seaboard  area  wedded  to 
cotton  culture  and  slave  labor. 

In  the  preceding  chapter  the  movement  of  settlers  across 
the  Alleghanies  into  the  heart  of  the  continent  was  sketched 
with  particular  attention  to  the  geographical  conditions  af 
fecting  the  migration.  It  remains  here  to  point  out,  more 
specifically  than  in  the  earlier  discussion,  that  the  vast 
majority  of  the  pioneers  who  journeyed  westward, 

Some  to  endure,  and  many  to  fail, 
Some  to  conquer,  and  many  to  quail, 
Toiling  over  the  Wilderness  Trail, 

were  moved  by  economic  considerations.  As  the  East  be 
came  more  populous  and  economic  competition  grew  keener, 
ambitious  workingmen  in  the  cities  saw  an  opportunity  for 
improved  living  conditions  in  the  cheap  lands  of  the  Ohio 
valley;  and  farmers  working  the  smaller  and  less  fertile 
farms  saw  larger  holdings  and  greater  prosperity  in  the  West 
also.  The  same  attraction  was  felt  by  the  people  of  the  sea 
board  South,  by  the  better  class  of  the  "poor  whites"  who 
saw  in  Kentucky  and  the  free  Northwest  a  means  of  escape 
from  the  degrading  position  they  held  in  southern  society, 
and  by  planters  desirous  of  abandoning  their  worn-out  lands 


ECONOMIC  INFLUENCES  59 

for  new  estates  in  the  black  alluvial  belt  of  the  Gulf  coast. 
Other  economic  incentives  were  at  work  as  well.  Let  us 
analyze  the  successive  waves  of  migration  into  the  frontier 
as  they  have  been  so  often  pictured  for  us  by  writers  on  the 
subject.  The  desire  for  hunting  and  fur-trading  animated 
the  first  comers.  Then  hard-by  followed  the  land  specu 
lators.  Next  came  men  seeking  new  lands  for  cultivation 
or  cattle  grazing.  As  homes  began  to  multiply,  opportunities 
were  opened  up  for  business  enterprise  in  commerce  and 
transportation.  So  swiftly  did  one  group  follow  another 
that  sometimes  they  became  an  almost  indistinguishable  mass. 

The  transfer  of  population  from  east  to  west  occurred 
with  amazing  rapidity.  In  these  early  years,  frontier  con 
ditions  prevailed  throughout  the  Mississippi  valley,  south  of 
the  Ohio  river  as  well  as  north.  Much  the  same  difficulties 
confronted  the  pioneer  in  Mississippi  and  Alabama  as  in 
Indiana  and  Illinois  and  tended  to  give  to  the  West  a  simi 
larity  of  outlook.  Great  commonwealths  were  founded  and 
admitted  into  the  Union ;  and  a  new  and  threatening  influ 
ence,  the  outgrowth  largely  of  the  economic  conditions  of 
wilderness  life,  made  its  appearance  in  national  politics. 

The  West  was  totally  unlike  the  older  East  in  its  sympa 
thies,  ideals  and  needs.  The  abundance  of  cheap  lands 
promoted  individualism,  economic  equality  and  a  lyric  enthu 
siasm  for  government  by  the  people.  The  major  problems 
of  the  people  had  to  do  with  the  paucity  of  transportation 
facilities,  and  the  lack  of  capital  for  the  proper  development 
of  the  region.  With  some  direct  connection  through  the 
mountains  with  the  eastern  markets,  the  western  farmers 
might  dispose  of  their  surplus  crops  to  much  greater  advan 
tage  and  receive  in  return  those  manufactured  articles  which 
added  so  greatly  to  the  comfort  of  living.  With  a  greater 
abundance  of  fluid  capital,  local  improvements  of  all  kinds 
might  be  made,  economic  enterprise  stimulated,  and  the 


60    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

region  more  rapidly  developed.  The  national  policies  which 
the  westerners  favored  were,  as  we  shall  see,  the  resultant 
of  their  democratic  idealism  and  economic  needs. 

,  New  England  and  the  Middle  Atlantic  states  formed 
another  fairly  homogeneous  economic  unit.  Throughout  the 
colonial  period  and  during  the  first  decades  of  national  inde 
pendence,  the  economic  life  of  New  England  had  been 
centered  in  shipbuilding  and  the  carrying  trade.  But  the 
adoption  of  the  embargo  and  other  restrictive  trade  measures 
by  Jefferson  and  Madison,  followed  by  the  War  of  1812, 
led  to  a  stagnation  of  New  England  commerce,  though  it 
created  conditions  ideally  fitted  for  the  stimulation  of 
American  manufacturing.  While  New  Englanders  who 
could  see  their  future  only  in  their  past  became  disgruntled 
with  the  federal  government  and  began  a  campaign  of  dis 
affection  and  protest  that  culminated  in  the  Hartford  Con 
vention  of  1814,  other  men  of  the  region,  shrewder  to  seize 
a  new  opportunity,  turned  their  capital  from  shipping  to 
manufacturing.  They  saw  that  their  section  possessed  an 
almost  unexploited  source  of  wealth  in  the  abundant  water 
power  furnished  by  its  swift  rivers,  and  that,  with  the  proper 
application  of  human  energy,  the  wheels  of  industry  might 
soon  be  made  to  turn.  Hence,  already  by  1815,  500,000 
spindles  and  76,000  persons  were  employed  in  the  manufac 
ture  of  cotton,  chiefly  in  New  England,  and  the  annual  output 
of  woolens  was  estimated  to  be  worth  nineteen  millions  of 
dollars.  In  the  Middle  Atlantic  states — New  York,  New 
Jersey  and  Pennsylvania— manufacturing  had  already  become 
a  principal  industry ;  and  their  economic  interests  thus  tended 
to  unite  them  politically  with  New  England. 

The  new  factories  of  the  seaboard  North  produced  so 
much  more  than  had  the  old  domestic  processes  that  markets 
for  the  disposal  of  their  output  were  needed  in  those  parts 
of  the  country  in  which  no  manufacturing  was  to  be  found. 


ECONOMIC  INFLUENCES  61 

But  to  bring  this  about,  two  obstacles  had  to  be  surmounted. 
The  difficulties  of  trade  with  the  West  and  the  South  were 
immense  owing  to  the  lack  of  proper  means  of  transportation. 
Moreover,  in  these  markets  the  eastern  manufacturers  and 
merchants  found  themselves  in  competition  with  English 
manufacturers  who  could  undersell  them  because  of  their 
lower  cost  of  production.  So  here,  too,  as  in  the  case  of 
the  frontier  states,  was  a  combination  of  conditions  that  were 
productive  of  definite  national  policies. 

The  third  area  that  stood  cemented  by  common  economic 
ties  was  the  South  or,  to  be  more  exact  in  speaking  of  the 
early  years  of  the  Middle  Period,  the  South  Atlantic  states. 
Since  the  invention  of  Eli  Whitney's  cotton  gin  in  1793,  the 
attention  of  this  section  had  become  increasingly  absorbed 
in  the  development  of  cotton  culture.  From  a  crop  of  negli 
gible  importance  the  total  product  leaped  in  1800  to  about 
thirty-five  million  pounds,  of  which  a  little  more  than  half 
was  sent  abroad,  and  in  1820  arose  to  one  hundred  and  sixty 
million  pounds,  of  which  more  than  three- fourths  were 
exported.  The  rapid  growth  of  the  cotton  industry  was  as 
important  in  one  of  its  indirect  results  as  it  was  in  its  direct 
effect,  for  it  caused  a  rejuvenation  of  the  institution  of  negro 
slavery. 

It  is  a  truism  of  the  historians  that  slavery  was,  at  bottom, 
a  geographic  and  economic  question.  Slavery  had  existed 
throughout  the  thirteen  colonies  at  the  start,  but  before  long 
it  had  begun  to  show  signs  of  thinning  out  in  the  northern 
section  where  slaves  had  no  useful  part  to  play  in  the  pre 
vailing  system  of  economic  life — small  farms  and  mercantile 
establishments.  Even  in  the  South  slavery  appeared  to  per 
form  no  vital  economic  function  in  colonial  times  except 
possibly  in  the  rice  fields  of  South  Carolina  and  Georgia. 
During  the  high  emotional  excitement  aroused  by  the  Revo 
lutionary  War,  steps  were  taken  for  the  abolition  of  slavery 


62    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

in  all  the  states  north  of  Maryland.  At  the  time  of  the 
federal  Constitutional  Convention  a  general  expectation  was 
shared  alike  by  southerners  and  northerners  that  the  institu 
tion  of  slavery  was  destined  to  gradual  extinction  in  the 
course  of  the  next  generation  or  so. 

But  the  vast  expansion  of  cotton  culture  due  to  Whitney's 
invention  put  the  matter  in  a  new  light.  Cotton  culture  was 
peculiarly  adapted  to  the  employment  of  slave  labor.  Its 
simple  requirements,  not  involving  the  use  of  expensive 
machinery,  gave  systematic  employment  for  most  of  the 
year  and  permitted  the  use  of  women  and  children  as  well 
as  adult  men.  Cotton  growing  was  so  profitable  that  there 
was  no  incentive  to  a  diversification  of  industry,  for  which 
slave  labor  would  have  been  unsuited.  The  low  cotton 
plants,  moreover,  allowed  the  overseer  to  superintend  a  large 
gang  of  workers.  The  new  importance  of  slaves  was  re 
flected  in  their  rising  market  value.  The  prohibition  of 
slave  importation  in  1808  at  the  same  time  that  the  demand 
was  increasing  made  this  rise  unusually  sharp.  The  average 
value  of  a  good  field  hand  about  the  time  of  the  invention 
of  the  cotton  gin  was  $200.00;  by  1815  it  was  $250.00,  by 
1836  $600.00,  and  in  1850  $1000.00.  By  1850  the  value  of 
the  slave  property  in  the  entire  South  amounted,  at  a  conser 
vative  computation,  to  more  than  one  and  one-quarter  billions 
of  dollars.  Corresponding  with  this  new  background  of 
southern  economic  life,  we  find  the  teachers  and  religious 
leaders  of  that  section  at  first  palliating  the  institution  and 
then,  later,  roundly  defending  it  on  moral,  biblical  and  ethnic 
.grounds. 

Having  developed  an  economic  system  based  upon  agri 
culture  and  centering  in  cotton  culture,  the  public  men  of 
the  South  Atlantic  seaboard  became  increasingly  interested 
in  political  measures  that  would  contribute  to  their  sectional 
prosperity.  From  early  colonial  times  the  population  had 


ECONOMIC  INFLUENCES  63 

relied  upon  Great  Britain  for  cloth  and  tools  and  luxuries; 
and  with  the  development  of  English  cotton  manufactures, 
they  found  their  most  profitable  market  for  raw  cotton  in 
that  country.  They  were  therefore  opposed  to  any  measures 
of  the  federal  government  which  might  interfere  with  this 
natural  and  mutually  profitable  exchange  of  goods.  In  the 
northern  proposal  of  a  protective  tariff  they  saw  only  higher 
prices  for  the  goods  they  consumed  with  no  corresponding 
benefits  for  themselves. 

The  period  from  1800  to  1830  was  a  time  of  economic 
transition  and  change  in  the  case  of  all  three  sections;  and 
it  was  not  until  the  latter  date  that  the  distinctive  economic 
character  of  each  was  definitely  fixed  and  the  section  had 
become  politically  self-conscious.  The  real  inwardness  of 
the  history  of  the  United  States  to  the  Civil  War  cannot  be 
understood  without  constant  reference  to  these  cross 
currents  and  countercurrents  of  sectional  interest.  It  is 
possible  here  to  consider  only  a  few  of  the  more  important 
aspects  of  the  history  of  that  time. 

The  West  did  «•&  speak  with  jj^divided  voice.  One  impor 
tant  element,  led  by  Henry  Clay  of  Kentucky  and  repre 
senting  the  nascent  industrial  interests  of  the  region,  were 
ardent  advocates  of  internal  improvements  at  national  ex 
pense,  and  held,  furthermore,  that  the  United  States  govern 
ment  should  assist  the  states  financially  by  a  distribution  of 
the  proceeds  of  the  sales  of  public  lands.  The  majority  of 
the  backwoodsmen  were  probably  better  represented  by 
Andrew  Jackson  of  Tennessee  and  Thomas  H.  Benton  of 
Missouri,  who  had  a  simple  and  hearty  belief  that  the  diffi 
culties  of  the  masses  would  be  removed  when  officers  trusted 
by  the  common  people  were  placed  in  charge  of  the  govern 
ment.  This  element,  when  forced  to  define  their  views 
further,  revealed  an  inbred  suspicion  of  governmental  inter 
ference  in  the  affairs  of  the  people;  and,  convinced  that 


64    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

banks  had  hindered  rather  than  helped  western  development 
through  irresponsible  issues  of  paper  money,  they  favored 
the  disestablishment  of  the  Second  United  States  Bank  and 
the  use  of  "hard  money"  as  the  standard  circulating  medium. 
They  believed  that  the  federal  government  should  hand  over 
to  each  state  the. unsold  public  lands  within  its  borders;  and 
as  for  the  transportation  problem,  they  would  solve  it  by 
having  the  states  appropriate  the  proceeds  of  land  sales  to 
that  purpose  and  also  through  the  initiative  of  private  enter 
prise. 

The  major  political  interest  of  the  northern  seaboard  states 
was  focused  on  an  adequate  protective  tariff  system  for  the 
encouragement  of  domestic  manufactures.  As  tributary  to 
this  central  idea,  the  business  class  of  that  section  were 
strong  friends  of  the  United  States  Bank,  which  made  for 
stable  money  conditions,  and  of  national  aid  to  internal 
improvements,  which  would  facilitate  the  marketing  of  their 
wares.  The  political  acumen,  and  the  economic  substratum, 
of  Henry  Clay's  much  vaunted  "American  System"  may  now 
be  apparent.  By  joining  in  political  wedlock  the  two  prin 
ciples  of  protection  and  national  internal  improvements,  he 
hoped  to  bind  the  Northeast  and  the  West  in  a  political  alli 
ance  solidified  by  the  consciousness  of  mutual  economic 
advantage. 

There  were,  to  be  sure,  other  elements  in  the  population 
of  the  northern  seaboard  section  who  felt  that  their  interests 
were  not  served  by  the  legislation  advocated  by  the  business 
and  manufacturing  classes — the  mechanics  in  the  cities  and 
the  small  farmers.  They  were  best  represented  in  the  poli 
tics  of  the  time  by  Martin  Van  Buren  and,  in  general,  their 
outlook  on  politics  resembled  that  of  Jackson's  followers 
in  the  West. 

The  people  of  the  South  Atlantic  seaboard  states  were 
mainly  interested  in  preserving  or  establishing  conditions  of 


ECONOMIC  INFLUENCES  65 

free  trade,  an  attitude  and  purpose  which  brought  them  at 
once  into  collision  with  the  tariff  demands  of  the  northern 
manufacturers.  They  were  not  averse  to  the  United  States 
Bank,  and  only  by  gradual  stages  were  they  adopting  pro 
nounced  views  against  national  aid  for  internal  improvements. 
Although  they  were  watchfulfor  any  interference  with  the 
slavery  system,  the  militant  abolition  movement  was  just 
getting  under  way  in  the  decade  of  the  thirties  and,  as  yet, 
they  had  little  to  fear.  South  Carolina  was  still  the  chief 
cotton  state,  and  John  C.  Calhoun  was  her  prophet  and 
statesman. 

It  is  now  possible  to  follow  these  sectional  economic  needs 
and  aspirations  into  the  hurly-burly  of  actual  politics.  The 
John  Quincy  Adams  administration,  which  came  into  office 
in  1825,  represented  a  combination  of  New  England  with  the 
Clay  element  of  the  West ;  and  the  laws  enacted  during  the 
four-year  period  testified  eloquently  to  the  zeal  of  those  two 
leaders  in  promoting  the  interests  of  their  sections.  More 
than  twice  as  much  was  appropriated  for  roads  and  harbors 
as  in  the  whole  previous  history  of  the  country;  and  the 
tariff  was  increased  from  an  average  of  thirty-three  per  cent 
under  the  act  of  1824  to  a  general  level  of  forty-nine  per 
cent  (1828). 

The  election  of  Jackson  in  1828  came  as  the  result  of  an 
alliance  of  the  planters  of  the  seaboard  South  and  the 
Jackson  western  element,  assisted  by  Van  Buren's  followers 
in  the  Northeast.  Under  President  Jackson,  national  appro 
priations  for  internal  improvements  were  checked,  the  United 
States  Bank  destroyed,  the  Specie  Circular  issued,  the 
Indians  ejected  from  Georgia;  and  in  lieu  of  the  surrender 
of  the  unsold  public  lands  to  the  several  states,  the  surplus 
revenue  was  distributed  among  them.  Not  long  after  the 
beginning  of  Jackson's  term  the  flimsy  character  of  the 
political  combination  that  elected  him  became  apparent. 


66    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

South  Carolina  decided  to  take  a  stand  against  the  protective 
system,  even  to  the  extremity  of  nullification,  if  necessary; 
but  the  leaders  of  that  state  discovered,  to  their  dismay,  that 
the  president  was  inclined  to  be  indifferent  to  their  needs 
and  determined  at  all  odds  to  prevent  any  steps  toward  dis 
union.  The  South  Carolina  group,  followed  by  many  indi 
vidual  Democrats  in  other  parts  of  the  Southeast,  thereupon 
abandoned  the  party  until  a  time  should  come  when  the  evil 
Jackson  influence  had  waned  and  the  party  might  be  made 
to  stand  for  southern  interests. 

Toward  this  culmination  time  was  indeed  working  in 
behalf  of  the  cotton  planters.  As  the  initial  difficulties  of 
pioneer  life  in  Alabama,  Mississippi  and  Tennessee  were 
overcome,  the  plantation  system  of  cotton  growing  was 
rapidly  extended  throughout  that  region.  This  westward 
spread  of  large  scale  cotton  culture  soon  broke  down  the 
contrast  between  Southeast  and  Southwest.  It  is  an  eco 
nomic  fact  of  great  political  import  that,  whereas  in  1824  the 
annual  cotton  production  of  the  South  Atlantic  states  was 
almost  double  that  of  the  Gulf  states,  this  ratio  was  reversed 
in  1841.  By  the  latter  date  it  was  beginning  to  be  possible 
to  speak  of  the  South  from  the  Atlantic  to  the  Mississippi 
and  beyond  as  a  compact  political  entity. 

The  Cotton  South  proceeded  to  organize  itself  to  dominate 
the  federal  government  and  decided  to  use  the  Democratic 
party  as  its  special  instrument  for  that  purpose.  The  leaders 
of  the  South  were  constantly  kept  acutely  conscious  of  the 
peculiar  economic  situation  of  their  section  by  the  increasing 
severity  of  the  anti-slavery  agitation  in  the  North.  A  power 
ful  and  pervasive  influence  began  to  be  felt  in  national  poli 
tics,  the  "Slave  Power"  or  the  "Slavocracy,"  in  its  operations 
not  unlike  the  "Money  Power"  or  the  "Plutocracy"  in  the 
period  since  the  Civil  War.  So  successful  was  this  new 
political  force  that  from  1844  to  the  Civil  War  every  presi- 


ECONOMIC  INFLUENCES  67 

dential  candidate  of  the  Democratic  party  was  a  southerner 
or  a  northerner  with  southern  views.  The  basic  political 
objects  of  the  "Slave  Power,"  other  than  the  lowering  of 
the  tariff,  were  the  extension  of  slavery  into  the  federal 
territories,  and  the  annexation  of  foreign  soil  suitable  for  the 
peculiar  system  of  labor.  These  were  two  aspects  of  the 
same  economic  need  since  the  prevailing  system  of  cotton 
culture  brought  about  the  rapid  exhaustion  of  the  soil  and 
necessitated  expansion  into  undeveloped  lands  wherever  they 
might  be  found.  Moreover,  the  building  up  of  new  slave 
commonwealths  enabled  the  South  to  maintain  its  equality 
in  the  United  States  Senate  with  the  rapidly  growing  North. 

To  be  successful  in  national  politics  the  cotton  interests 
must  add  to  their  own  voting  strength  the  support  of  the 
pioneer  farmers  of  the  Northwest.  How  this  was  done  is 
a  record  of  shrewd  political  strategy  that  can  be  only  lightly 
touched  on  here.  In  the  campaign  of  1844  the  South  won 
the  support  of  the  Northwest  for  the  annexation  of  Texas 
by  bracketing  this  demand  with  a  demand  for  Oregon. 
Shortly  after,  when  the  question  arose  as  to  slavery  in  the 
Mexican  cessions  following  the  peace  of  Guadaloupe 
Hidalgo  (1848),  the  southerners  were  willing  to  concede  the 
principle  of  popular  sovereignty  for  its  solution,  a  device 
having  a  peculiar  appeal  to  the  pioneer  Northwest  with  its 
predilections  for  local  self-government.  The  same  device 
was  applied  dramatically  in  1854  when  the  Missouri  Com 
promise  line  of  36°  30'  was  abolished  and  the  territories  of 
Kansas  and  Nebraska  were  opened  to  possible  slave  settle 
ment. 

But  in  this  last  manoeuvre  the  southern  Democrats  and 
their  northern  allies  overshot  themselves.  The  territories  in 
question  formed  a  part  of  the  public  domain  which  the 
northern  farmers  and  workingmen,  and  the  European  peas 
ants  who  had  immigrated  into  the  North,  regarded  as 


68    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

peculiarly  their  own  for  settlement.  The  people  of  the 
Northwest  thus  became  acutely  aware  of  a  fundamental 
antagonism  of  interest  between  the  slavery  system  and  free 
labor,  and  thereafter  they  were  ready  to  join  themselves 
with  the  anti-slavery  idealists  of  the  North  in  a  battle  to 
the  death  with  the  "Slave  Power."  From  this  combination 
of  circumstances  arose  the  Republican  party,  "a  purely 
sectional  party,"  as  Stephen  A.  Douglas  said,  "with  a  plat 
form  that  cannot  cross  the  Ohio  river."  Henceforth  the 
political  alignment  of  the  nation  was  distinctively  one  of 
North  against  South.  When  the  Republicans  proved  suc 
cessful  in  the  election  of  Lincoln  in  1860,  the  dominant 
leadership  of  the  cotton  states  believed  that  the  only  hope 
of  safeguarding  their  future  prosperity  lay  in  the  establish 
ment  of  a  southern  slave  republic.  The  economic  antagonism 
>of  the  sections,  exacerbated,  of  course,  by  personal,  political, 
ethical  and  psychological  differences,  thus  plunged  the  nation 
into  the  great  Civil  War. 


It  is  hardly  necessary  here  to  advert  to  the  fact  that  the 
superior  economic  resources  of  the  North  were  the  decisive 
factor  in  determining  the  issue  of  the  war  favorably  to  the 
Union.  The  South  paid  the  penalty  of  having  confined  its 
productive  efforts  practically  to  the  growing  of  one  staple 
crop.  From  the  moment  that  the  federal  blockade  became 
effective,  the  doom  of  the  South  was  sealed  unless  some 
military  victory  might  miraculously  turn  the  tide  of  events. 
The  Confederacy  hoped  anxiously  for  recognition  from 
Great  Britain  because  of  the  dependence  of  British  textile 
manufacturers  upon  southern  cotton;  but  the  British  situa 
tion  in  that  respect  was  somewhat  relieved  by  the  importation 
of  cotton  from  Egypt  and  India,  and  crop  failures  during 
1860,  1 86 1  and  1862  made  the  British  people  more  anxious 
for  northern  wheat  than  southern  cotton. 


ECONOMIC  INFLUENCES  69 

The  close  of  the  Civil  War  was  followed  by  an  epoch  of 
tremendous  economic  and  industrial  development  which 
transformed  the  whole  fabric  of  American  life  and  raised 
far-reaching  questions  of  political  and  economic  policy. 
These  matters  are  discussed  at  some  length  elsewhere  in  this 
volume,1  and  indeed  form  a  part  of  the  common  stock  of 
knowledge  of  our  times.  Suffice  it  to  say  here  that  our 
thinking  today  is  perhaps  more  distinctively  in  economic 
terms  than  ever  before.  Any  list  of  campaign  issues  will 
at  once  reveal  this — such  questions,  for  instance,  as  the 
tariff,  the  merchant  marine,  the  currency,  the  railroads,  trust 
regulation.  Or  any  survey  of  newspaper  editorials  on 
domestic  affairs — covering  topics  like  the  "open  shop/'  co 
operation,  immigration,  farmers'  grievances,  the  high  cost 
of  living  and  profiteering — leads  to  the  same  conclusion. 

Although  economic  influences  are  probably  no  more  potent 
in  American  life  than  earlier,  they  are  more  frankly  accepted 
than  ever  before.  Present-day  politics  is  very  largely  the 
resultant  of  a  complex  of  economic  and  social  forces, 
working  frequently  at  cross  purposes  with  each  other;  and 
the  "principal  task  of  modern  legislation"  continues  to  be, 
in  the  classic  language  of  James  Madison,  "the  regulation 
of  these  various  and  interfering  interests." 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

John  Bach  McMaster  broke  new  ground  in  1883  when  he  pub 
lished  the  first  volume  of  his  monumental  work,  A  History  of  the 
People  of  the  United  States  (8  v.;  New  York,  1883-1913),  for  it 
was  his  purpose  to  recount  the  history  of  the  United  States  from  a 
social  point  of  view.  Garnering  his  facts  very  largely  from  the 
files  of  old  newspapers  and  setting  them  forth  with  photographic 
fidelity,  he  portrayed  the  life  of  the  masses  with  a  profuseness  of 
detail  that  gave  new  realism  to  the  old  story. 

But  Professor  McMaster  was  concerned  rather  with  reconstruct 
ing  a  human  chronicle  than  with  accounting  for  the  mainsprings  of 
social  conduct.  The  first  historian  who  perceived  the  importance  of 
economic  influences  in  American  history  was  Frederick  Jackson 
Turner,  who  first  expounded  his  views  publicly  in  his  address,  "The 

1  Chapter    xi. 


70    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

Significance  of  the  Frontier  in  American  History,"  printed  in  the 
Annual  Report  of  the  American  Historical  Association  for  1893,  pp. 
199-227.  Compare  p.  45  of  the  present  volume.  Professor  Turner's 
main  interest,  in  this  and  many  later  papers,  was  to  trace  the 
influence  of  frontier  conditions,  particularly  the  abundance  of  cheap 
lands,  upon  our  historical  development.  The  most  important  of 
these  essays  may  be  found  in  convenient  form  in  his  The  Frontier 
in  American  History  (New  York,  1920).  Although  Professor 
Turner  had  reached  his  conclusions  independently,  it  is  a  matter  of 
interest  that  his  main  thesis  had  been  set  forth  as  early  as  January, 
1865,  by  Ernest  Lawrence  Godkin  in  his  article  entitled  "Aristocratic 
Opinions  of  Democracy"  in  the  North  American  Review  (reprinted 
in  his  Problems  of  Modern  Democracy,  New  York,  1896). 

Under  Professor  Turner's  influence,  a  new  direction  was  given  to 
American  historical  research ;  and  many  articles  and  books  have  been 
written  by  students  who  sought  to  apply  his  viewpoint  to  particular 
periods  or  aspects  of  American  history.  A  bibliography  of  these 
writings  would  be  too  extensive  for  inclusion  here ;  but  the  mention 
of  a  few  of  the  names  of  the  authors  will  suggest  the  scope  and 
character  of  the  work  that  has  been  done:  Reuben  Gold  Thwaites, 
Clarence  W.  Alvord,  Solon  J.  Buck,  Clarence  E.  Carter,  Isaac  J. 
Cox,  Archibald  Henderson,  Homer  C.  Hockett,  Frederic  L.  Paxson, 
Louis  Pelzer  and  Milo  M.  Quaife.  The  Turner  point  of  view  is 
most  felicitously  presented  in  his  own  volume  of  essays,  already 
cited ;  but  excellent  restatements  may  be  found  in  Woodrow  Wilson's 
"The  Making  of  the  Nation"  in  the  Atlantic  Monthly,  vol.  80,  pp. 
1-14;  Archibald  Henderson's  The  Conquest  of  the  Old  Southwest 
(New  York,  1920),  pp.  ix-xix ;  and  Frederic  L.  Paxson's  The  Last 
American  Frontier  (New  York,  1910),  chap.  i. 

The  Turner  school  of  historians  has  tended  to  discuss  American 
development  in  geographic  terms  and  has  generally  avoided  the 
expression,  "economic  interpretation  of  history";  it  has,  on  the 
whole,  paid  little  attention  to  the  role  of  industrial  capitalism  and 
the  wage  system  in  American  history.  Indeed  it  was  not  until  the 
early  years  of  the  twentieth  century  that  students  of  history  began, 
frankly  and  comprehensively,  to  apply  an  economic  analysis  to 
American  history.  A  strong  impulse  in  this  direction  was  furnished 
by  the  manuals  prepared  by  several  economists  interested  in  deline 
ating  the  economic  and  industrial  history  of  the  country.  Not 
counting  the  earlier  work  done  by  J.  L.  Bishop  and  A.  S.  Bolles,  there 
appeared  in  a  short  space  of  years  Carroll  D.  Wright's  The  Indus 
trial  Evolution  of  the  United  States  (New  York,  1895)  ;  Horace 
White's  Money  and  Banking  Illustrated  by  American  History  (Bos 
ton,  1895)  ;  Davis  Rich  Dewey's  Financial  History  of  the  United 
States  (New  York,  1902)  ;  Katharine  Coman's  The  Industrial  His 
tory  of  the  United  States  (New  York.  1905)  ;  Ernest  Ludlow 
Bogart's  The  Economic  History  of  the  United  States  (New  York, 
1907)  ;  and  Guy  Stevens  Calender's  Selections  from  the  Economic 
History  of  the  United  States,  1765-1860,  with  Introductory  Essays 
(Boston,  1009). 

A  number  of   Socialist   writers   now   came   forward  as  avowed 


ECONOMIC  INFLUENCES  71 

economic  dcterminists  and  set  themselves  the  task  of  justifying  the 
Marxian  view  of  historical  development.  A.  M.  Simons  s  Class 
Struyyles  in  America  (Chicago,  1903)  and  his  Social  I'orces  in 
AwunCQH  History  (New  York,  1912),  Austin  Lewis's  The  Rise  of 
the  American  Proletarian  (Chicago,  1907),  James  Oneal's  The 
Workers  in  American  History  (New  York,  1910;  revised  and  en- 
larged  in  1912  and  in  1921),  and  Gustavus  Myers's  History  of  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  (Chicago,  1012)  are  richly 
suggestive,  though  untrustworthy,  surveys  written  from  the  stand 
point  of  Marxian  exegesis. 

Not  until  1913  clfd  an  American  student  of  scholarly  standing 
and  scientific  historical  training  undertake  to  apply  the  concept  of 
economic  interpretation  to  American  history  with  careful  docu 
mentation  and  infinite  detailed  analysis.  In  that  year  appeared 
Charles  A.  Beard's  An  Economic  Interpretation  of  the  Constitu 
tion  of  the  United  States  (New  York),  the  first  of  a  series  of 
volumes  under  the  general  title  An  Economic  Interpretation  of 
American  Politics,  of  which  the  second  appeared  two  years  later, 
Economic  Origins  of  Jeffcrsonian  Democracy  (New  York,  1915), 

From  this  account  it  is  not  to  be  thought  that  other  historians 
of  our  day  have  been  unaware  of  the  economic  influence  in  Ameri 
can  history,  for  most  members  of  the  modern  school  have  recognized 
its  existence  in  a  greater  or  less  degree.  Charles  McLean  Andrews, 
for  example,  following  in  the  footsteps  of  W.  B.  Weedcn,  P.  A. 
Bruce  and  G.  L.  Beer,  has  gone  a  long  way  toward  rewriting  colonial 
history  from  an  economic  point  of  view;  and  delvers  in  the  later 
periods  of  American  history  are  constantly  making  greater  use  of  an 
economic  explanation  of  events  and  movements.  Nevertheless,  it  is 
a  significant  fact  that  the  standard  Cyclopedia  of  American  Govern 
ment  (3  v.  edited  by  Andrew  Cunningham  McLaughlin  and  Albert 
Bushnell  Hart;  New  York,  1913)  does  not  include  the  economic 
interpretation  of  history  among  the  subjects  for  treatment. 

Advocates  of  the  theory  of  economic  determinism  do  not  usually 
deny  the  existence  of  geographic,  moral,  religious  and  other  forces 
in  history  nor  the  contributions  made  by  great  men.  But,  following 
F.ngels,  Marx's  collaborator,  they  hold  that  even  the  ideas  and 
ethical  code  of  any  age  are  influenced,  and  in  the  long  run  con 
trolled,  by  its  economic  background,  although  the  acceptance  of  new 
standards  may  be  delayed  by  the  transmitted  conceptions  of  a 
former  age,  which  in  turn  had  been  the  product  of  economic  con 
ditions  once  prevailing.  As  for  the  superman  in  history,  they  assert 
that,  while  his  appearance  at  a  particular  crisis  mav  seem  to  be  a 
matter  of  chance,  he  is  able  to  influence  society  only  when  society 
is  ready  for  him.  If  conditions  are  not  ripe,  he  is  called,  not  a  great 
man,  but  a  mad  man  or  a  visionary.  The  best  critique  by  an 
American  of  the  economic  theory  of  historical  development  is 
Kdwin  R.  A.  Scligman's  The  Economic  Interpretation  of  History 
Ud  ed.,  revised,  New  York,  1917). 


CHAPTER  IV 

THE  DECLINE  OF  ARISTOCRACY  IN  AMERICA 

Aristocracy  is  something  more  than  a  form  of  govern 
mental  organization.  It  is  an  outlook  on  life  that  infuses  its 
peculiar  spirit  of  exclusiveness  and  superiority,  of  self-pride 
and  special  privilege,  into  all  phases  of  human  relationship. 
It  is  mirrored  in  the  manners  and  morals  of  a  people,  in 
their  religious  organization  and  beliefs,  in  their  provisions 
for  education,  in  their  language  and  their  literature,  in  their 
labor  system,  and  in  the  relations  of  the  sexes  to  each  other, 
as  well  as  in  their  system  of  government  and  law.  To 
Americans  of  today  the  most  inspiring  theme  in  American 
history  is  the  story  of  the  successive  advances  of  the  common 
inan  into  rights  and  powers  and  opportunities  previously 
monopolized  by  an  exclusive  class;  we  call  it  the  rise  of 
democracy.  But  to  our  anxious  ancestors  watching  with 
deep  misgivings  the  restless  stirrings  and  recurrent  upheavals 
of  the  nether  strata  of  society,  the  changes  that  occurred 
appeared  not  as  the  working  out  of  a  beneficent  destiny  but 
as  the  degradation  of  all  that  seemed  good  and  stable  in  the 
world.  In  their  eyes  each  new  victory  won  by  the  masses, 
whether  in  government  or  education  or  in  some  other  depart 
ment  of  life,  signified  the  yielding  of  aristocracy  to  the  com 
bined  forces  of  ignorance,  avarice  and  mobocracy. 

The  story  of  the  struggle  of  aristocracy  against  democracy 
is  a  complex  one,  touching  the  life  of  the  past  generations 
of  American  society  at  many  vital  points  and  throwing  much 
light  upon  the  processes  of  human^  progress.  In  the  sketch 

72 


DECLINE  OF  ARISTOCRACY  IN  AMERICA      73 

that  follows  it  is  only  possible  to  dwell  upon  some  of  the 
outstanding  phases  of  this  long  conflict. 


Judged  by  our  present-day  standards,  the  aristocratic  idea 
was  firmly  enthroned  in  the  life  of  the  people  in  colonial 
times.  At  the  apex  of  the  social  pyramid  stood  the  colonial 
governor  with  the  official  class  that  surrounded  him,  consti 
tuting  a  caste  that  looked  to  England  not  only  for  its  govern 
mental  authority  but  also  for  its  models  and  standards  of 
social  conduct.  Life  at  the  governor's  court  was  gay  and 
extravagant,  and  frequently  brilliant;  to  become  members 
of  the  charmed  circle  was  the  aspiration,  and  sometimes  the 
despair,  of  the  colonial  aristocracy  which  ranked  next  in  the 
social  scale. 

In  every  province  such  a  native  aristocratic  class  had 
developed  irrespective  of  the  lowly  European  antecedents  of . 
the  original  settlers.  Social  and  political  leadership  in  New 
England  belonged  as  a  matter  of  custom  to  the  "well-born" — 
the  clergy,  the  professional  classes,  and  the  wealthier  mer 
chants.  Seats  in  the  meeting-houses,  places  at  the  table  and 
in  processions,  were  regulated  with  a  nice  regard  for  social 
differentiation.  Even  at  Harvard  College  students  were 
seated  according  to  social  rank,  whereby  John  Adams  found 
himself  fourteenth  in  a  class  of  twenty-four.  In  New 
York,  pre-eminence  belonged  to  the  landed  gentry,  living  in 
feudal  elegance  on  their  great  estates  along  the  Hudson,  and 
dominating  the  affairs  of  the  province  by  the  aid  of  their 
connections,  through  business  or  marriage,  with  the  wealthy 
merchant  families  of  New  York  city.  In  the  neighboring 
province  of  Pennsylvania  a  similar  position  was  occupied  by 
a  compact  group  of  rich  Quaker  families  dwelling  in  the 
eastern  counties  of  the  province. 

Class  distinctions  were  even  more  rigidly  maintained  in 


74    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

the  provinces  to  the  south.  In  those  parts  was  to  be  found 
an  aristocracy  of  birth  and  manners  which  more  nearly 
approached  its  counterpart  in  England  than  anything  else 
to  be  found  in  America.  Composed  of  the  owners  of  great 
plantations  and  resting  on  a  vital  distinction  between  slave 
labor  and  gentlemanly  leisure,  the  members  of  this  exclusive 
order  lived  a  life  of  luxurious  ease,  educated  their  sons 
abroad,  and  prided  themselves  on  keeping  abreast  the  modish 
fashions  of  London  society. 

As  befitted  their  social  position,  the  aristocratic  class  in 
all  the  colonies  occupied  the  seats  of  power  in  provincial 
politics.  In  order  to  insure  their  control  they  did  not  rely 
solely  upon  a  popular  acceptance  of  their  superior  qualifica 
tions,  for  they  entertained  no  exalted  notions  as  to  the  mental 
acuteness  of  the  average  man.  Hence  the  right  to  vote  was 
nowhere  bestowed  upon  all  men,  only  on  such  white  adult 
men  as  possessed  a  stated  amount  of  property ;  and  in  most 
provinces  they  must  in  addition  subscribe  to  certain  religious 
tenets.  For  fear  that  the  ease  of  acquiring  land  might  ren 
der  some  of  these  restrictions  nugatory  in  the  outlying  dis 
tricts,  the  ruling  class  employed  certain  additional  devices  to 
safeguard  their  privileged  position.  A  favorite  method  was 
to  postpone  the  political  organization  of  the  new  communi 
ties  as  long  as  possible,  and  then  to  allow  them  a  dispropor 
tionately  small  representation  in  the  provincial  legislature. 
As  a  result  of  such  practices,  the  mass  of  the  population 
in  every  province  was  excluded  from  participation  in  the 
government,  to  the  great  glory  of  the  aristocracy. 

Traces  of  the  aristocratic  principle  were  likewise  to  be 
found  in  education  and  religion.  In  Massachusetts  and 
Connecticut  alone  was  a  system  of  public  education  estab 
lished;  and  in  Pennsylvania  and  Virginia,  several  free 
elementary  schools  for  the  poor  had  been  founded  under*- 
private  auspices.  It  was  in  large  degree  true  elsewhere  that 


DECLINE  OF  ARISTOCRACY  IN  AMERICA      75 

schools  of  any  kind  were  rare ;  and  "higher  education"  was 
the  prerogative  of  the  wealthy  few.  In  four  of  the  southern 
provinces  the  Church  of  England  was  the  established  church, 
supported  out  of  public  funds,  and  in  Virginia  no  one  could 
be  legally  married  except  by  a  minister  of  the  established 
church.  Throughout  the  colonial  period  the  Congregational 
Church  occupied  a  similarly  privileged  position  in  Massa 
chusetts  and  Connecticut. 

The  distinction  between  "gentle  folk"  and  "simple  men" 
was  maintained  everywhere  throughout  the  colonies,  not 
merely  as  a  badge  of  social  distinction  but  also  as  a  deterrent 
to  the  political,  educational  and  social  advancement  of  those 
of  ungentle  rearing.  The  periwig  and  knee  breeches  were 
the  outward  token  of  the  inner  superiority  of  the  gentleman. 
The  mean-born  accepted  as  their  meed  the  bobwig  and  plain 
baggy  waistcoats  or  even  the  unlovely  pantaloons.  The  line 
of  cleavage  was  unmistakable  and  of  obvious  convenience; 
and  one  can  readily  understand  the  wrath  with  which  that 
fine  old  aristocrat,  Governor  Hutchinson  of  Massachusetts, 
charged  that  in  one  of  the  Stamp  Act  riots  "there  were  fifty 
gentlemen,  actors  in  this  scene,  disguised  with  trousers  and 
jackets  on."  The  inferior  class  were  numerically  in  the 
great  majority;  they  were  the  small  farmers,  the  shop 
keepers,  the  sailors,  the  artisans,  and  mechanics — the  plain 
people  of  the  time.  They  were  saved  from  being  the  base 
of  the  social  pyramid  only  by  the  fact  that  below  them, 
separated  by  an  infinite  gulf,  were  the  enslaved  negroes. 

As  the  colonial  period  approached  its  close,  there  began 
to  appear  signs  that  the  long-established  security  of  the  privi 
leged  order  was  being  threatened.  The  fact  that  land  was 
abundant  and  easily  obtainable  by  those  who  were  willing  to 
undergo  the  hardships  of  frontier  life  made  it  impossible 
to  build  up  a  rigid  and  enduring  caste  system  such  as  existed 
in  the  countries  of  the  Old  World.  The  backcountrymen 


76    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

always  proved  to  be  a  source  of  equalitarian  feeling;  and 
their  "leveling  spirit"  was  undoubtedly  accentuated  by  the 
addition  of  groups  of  immigrants  unfamiliar  with  and  dis 
regard  ful  of  petty  class  distinctions  in  the  New  World. 
The  period  of  agitation  preceding  the  Revolutionary  War 
added  fuel  to  the  flames  of  anti-aristocratic  feeling,  for  the 
great  tidewater  leaders  and  pamphleteers,  seeking  to  place 
the  controversy  with  the  mother  country  on  a  dignified 
philosophical  plane,  unintentionally  aroused  the  plain  people 
to  a  high  degree  of  excitement  and  self-assertion,  through 
their  constant  employment  of  such  expressions  as  "the 
natural  rights  of  men"  and  "no  taxation  without  represen 
tation."  In  particular  the  artisans  and  mechanics  of  the 
towns  were  galvanized  into  group-consciousness  and,  not 
withstanding  their  legal  exclusion  from  the  franchise,  they 
insisted  upon  playing  an  equal  part  with  the  well-to-do  in 
the  mass-meetings  and  informal  conventions  that  charac 
terized  the  period.  "The  mob  begin  to  think  and  to  reason," 
was  the  acute  observation  of  Gouverneur  Morris  in  1774, 
himself  an  aristocrat.  "Poor  reptiles !  it  is  with  them  a  vernal 
morning ;  they  are  struggling  to  cast  off  their  winter's  slough, 
they  bask  in  the  sunshine,  and  ere  noon  they  will  bite,  depend 
upon  it.  The  gentry  begin  to  fear  this." 

In  the  face  of  this  alarming  situation,  the  security  of  the 
aristocracy  depended  upon  presenting  a  united  front  to  the 
pretensions  of  the  unprivileged  orders ;  but  the  nature  of  the 
controversy  with  the  British  government  was  such  -as  to 
render  this  impossible.  The  colonial  aristocracy  found  itself 
of  two  minds.  The  wealthier  merchants  and  many  of  the 
distinguished  leaders  in  colonial  politics  (like  Thomas 
Hutchinson,  Joseph  Galloway  and  Daniel  Dulany)  were  im 
pelled  by  every  influence  of  tradition  and  social  connection 
to  ally  themselves  with  the  British  side  notwithstanding  their 
strong  colonial  sympathies.  "If  I  must  be  devoured," 


DECLINE  OF  ARISTOCRACY  IN  AMERICA      77 

declared  one  of  their  number,  "let  me  be  devoured  by  the 
jaws  of  a  lion,  and  not  gnawed  to  death  by  rats  and  vermin." 
When  the  armed  conflict  came,  thousands  of  men  and  women, 
bearing  the  stigma  of  "Tory,"  were  forced  to  flee  their  native 
land,  many  of  them  settling  in  Canada  where  they  became 
the  Pilgrim  Fathers  of  that  great  dominion.  Their  estates 
and  fortunes  were  confiscated  by  the  revolutionary  state 
governments ;  and  decrees  of  proscription  were  issued  against 
their  possible  return.  This  expatriation  was  likened  by  a 
contemporary  to  the  expulsion  of  the  Huguenots  upon  the 
revocation  of  the  Edict  of  Nantes.  But  other  members  of 
the  upper  class,  like  the  landed  gentry  of  the  South  and  some 
of  the  great  Quaker  merchants,  cast  their  fate  with  the 
revolutionists,  although  many  of  them  seriously  disapproved 
of  the  extremist  doctrines  advocated  by  the  popular  leaders. 
This  branch  of  the  aristocracy,  though  seriously  weakened 
by  the  defection  of  the  loyalists,  was  eventually  to  be  instru 
mental  in  restoring  the  caste  idea  in  American  life. 

ii 

The  first  great  official  denunciation  of  aristocratic  rule 
that  we  have  in  American  history  was  contained  in  the 
Declaration  of  Independence,  adopted  July  4,  1776.  This 
document  was  written  under  a  high  pressure  of  excitement, 
phrased  by  a  revolutionist  of  a  visionary  turn  of  mind,  and 
designed  to  rally  to  the  American  cause  the  liberals  of 
America  and  Europe.  It  has  therefore  not  erroneously  been 
called  a  political  platform.  Its  preamble  is  the  most  eloquent 
and  succinct  defense  of  the  rights  of  the  masses  and  of 
popular  rule  that  can  be  found  anywhere  in  the  English 
language.  Every  foe  of  aristocracy  the  world  over  has 
pondered  its  glowing  periods  and  adapted  them  to  his  own 
uses.  "We  hold  these  truths  to  be  self-evident,"  read  the 
immortal  words,  "that  all  men  are  created  equal,  that  they 


78    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

are  endowed  by  their  Creator  with  certain  unalienable  Rights, 
that  among  these  are  Life,  Liberty  and  the  pursuit  of  Happi 
ness.  That  to  secure  these  rights,  Governments  are  insti 
tuted  among  Men,  deriving  their  just  powers  from  the 
consent  of  the  governed.  That  whenever  any  form  of 
Government  becomes  destructive  of  these  ends,  it  is  the  Right 
of  the  People  to  alter  or  to  abolish  it,  and  to  institute  new 
Government,  laying  its  foundation  on  such  principles  and 
organizing  its  powers  in  such  form,  as  to  them  shall  seem 
most  likely  to  effect  their  Safety  and  Happiness." 

But  it  was  one  thing  to  hurl  these  exalted  sentiments 
against  the  King  of  England  and  the  colonial  representatives 
of  his  prerogative,  and  another  to  apply  the  bold  precepts  to 
the  conditions  under  which  people  actually  lived  in  America. 
The  members  of  the  aristocratic  class  who  had  joined  the 
revolutionary  movement  had  no  intention  of  surrendering 
their  own  special  privileges  in  government  and  society  simply 
because  they  had  joined  with  the  unlettered  masses  m  re 
pudiating  all  political  connection  with  royal  Britain.  What 
the  phrase  in  the  Declaration  respecting  equality  of  birth 
meant  to  the  signers,  it  is  difficult  to  say;  but  it  is  certain 
that  they  had  no  notion  of  setting  forth  a  program  of 
domestic  reform.  Neither  at  that  time  nor  for  many  years 
later  were  all  persons  in  America  equal  before  the  law  or 
in  the  making  of  the  law. 

The  actual  conditions  have  already  been  touched  on  and 
may  be  summed  up  as  follows:  One-sixth  of  the  population, 
woolly -haired  and  of  dusky  hue,  were  held  in  slavery.  Of 
the  remainder  of  the  people,  one  sex,  notwithstanding  its 
white  skin,  was  regarded  as  politically  and  legally  inferior  to 
the  other  sex.  White  men  were  ordinarily  regarded  as  pos 
sessing  equal  civil  rights,  but  the  great  majority  of  them  were 
excluded  from  political  participation  and  from  educational 
advantages.  To  be  sure,  aristocracy  in  America  lacked  one 


DECLINE  OF  ARISTOCRACY  IN  AMERICA      79 

important  sanction  of  the  upper  class  in  Europe  since  it  did 
not  possess  hereditary  titles ;  but  it  might  well  have  taken 
pride  in  the  fact  that  it  retained  its  privileged  position  amidst 
a  race  of  people  who,  notwithstanding  the  fetters  and  handi 
caps  that  have  been  mentioned,  possessed  at  that  time  greater 
freedom  than  any  other  people  in  the  world. 

The  era  of  post  bellum  reconstruction,  known  as  the 
Confederation  period,  undoubtedly  gave  the  aristocracy  its 
moments  of  fear  and  consternation.  Its  prerogatives  were 
seriously  jeopardized  by  the  social  ferment  of  the  times ;  but 
the  net  result,  as  we  shall  see,  was  a  vindication  of  the  well 
born  to  the  positions  of  leadership  and  public  trust.  The 
first  state  constitutions  adopted  by  the  colonies  shortly  after 
the  beginning  of  the  war  had  continued  the  traditional 
political  distinctions  between  class  and  mass  and  were  based 
upon  the  principle — the  Declaration  of  Independence  to  the 
contrary  notwithstanding — that  governments  derive  their  just 
powers  from  the  men  of  property  and  tax-payers.  Only  men  , 
possessing  a  property  stake  were  permitted  to  vote,  and  the 
right  to  hold  office  was  further  restricted  to  those  who  owned 
a  larger  amount  of  property  than  the  ordinary  voter. 
Religious  restrictions  also  remained  substantially  as  before. 
The  chief  manifestation  of  anti-aristocratic  feeling  in  these 
first  constitutions  appeared  in  the  introduction  of  new  rules 
regarding  the  inheritance  of  estates  when  the  owner  died 
intestate.  Primogeniture,  which  existed  in  colonial  New 
York  and  the  southern  provinces,  and  the  assignment  of 
double  portions  to  the  eldest  son,  which  was  the  practice  in 
certain  other  provinces,  were  done  away  with.  Likewise, 
entails  were  abolished  in  four  states.  Thus  the  American 
aristocracy  was  deprived  of  these  important  Old  World  props 
to  the  maintenance  of  a  landed  gentry.1 

1  The  same   principle  was  extended  a   few  years  later   to  the  public  domain 
northwest  of  the  Ohio  river  by  the  Ordinance  of   1787. 


80    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

A  more  serious  threat  to  the  ascendant  position  of  the 
aristocracy  resulted  from  the  disorganization  of  the  life  of 
the  people  by  the  impact  of  the  war.  Intense  popular  oppo 
sition  greeted  the  formation  of  the  Society  of  the  Cincinnati, 
organized  by  veterans  of  the  Revolutionary  War,  because 
of  the  fear  that  the  public  liberties  would  be  endangered  by 
a  secret  military  organization  in  which  membership  was  to 
be  perpetuated  by  hereditary  grant.  In  a  number  of  states 
the  party  of  the  masses  gained  control  of  the  government 
and  assailed  wealth  by  the  issuance  of  fiat  money  and  the 
passage  of  laws  for  postponing  the  payment  of  debts ;  else 
where,  as  in  New  Hampshire  and  Massachusetts,  the  waning 
respect  for  constituted  authority  was  shown  in  mob  demon 
strations  and  armed  uprisings.  County  conventions  in 
Massachusetts  in  1784  and  1785  declared  that  the  state  senate 
should  be  abolished  and  that  property  should  be  owned  in 
common. 

No  events  could  have  better  demonstrated  to  the  satis 
faction  of  the  aristocracy  the  incapacity  of  the  masses  for 
self-government;  and  with  a  zeal  animated  by  despair,  it 
turned  every  energy  to  recovering  its  lost  ascendancy  in 
public  affairs.  The  leaders  of  the  federal  Constitutional 
Convention,  which  assembled  in  1787,  were  brutally  frank 
in  passing  judgment  on  the  merits  of  government  by  the 
people.  Elbridge  Gerry,  confessing  that  he  "had  been  too 
republican  heretofore,"  declared  that  "the  evils  we  experience 
flow  from  the  excess  of  democracy."  Alexander  Hamilton 
denounced  the  masses  as  "turbulent  and  changing;  they  sel 
dom  judge  or  determine  right,"  and  ventured  the  opinion 
that  the  British  form  of  government  was  "the  best  in  the 
world."  Like  Gerry,  Edmund  Randolph  believed  that  the 
evils  of  the  country  had  their  origin  "in  the  turbulence  and 
follies  of  democracy."  Gouverneur  Morris  held  that  there 
was  no  more  reason  to  entrust  the  vote  to  "the  ignorant  & 


DECLINE  OF  ARISTOCRACY  IN  AMERICA      81 

the  dependent"  than  to  children.  Roger  Sherman  thought 
that  the  people  directly  "should  have  as  little  to  do  as  may 
be  about  the  government." 

The  Constitution  as  it  was  framed  by  the  Convention  was 
well  calculated  to  keep  the  plain  people  in  a  subordinate  place 
and  to  assure  political  power  to  the  men  of  substance  and 
quality.  Only  one  branch  of  the  federal  government  was 
made  directly  elective  by  the  people — and  the  separate  states 
were  permitted  to  continue  to  restrict  the  franchise  as  they 
chose.  The  more  powerful  branch  of  Congress,  the  Senate, 
was  to  be  chosen  by  the  state  legislatures  acting  in  behalf  of 
the  people.  The  president  was  to  be  selected  by  a  special 
group  of  men  in  each  state,  who  were  presumably  wiser  than 
ordinary  men  and  who  should  be  chosen  in  any  manner  that 
the  state  legislature  might  specify.  This  meant,  in  states 
where  the  legislatures  themselves  assumed  the  duty  of  ap 
pointing  the  presidential  electors,  that  the  chief  executive  of 
the  nation  was  three  removes  from  direct  popular  election. 
It  was  further  provided  that  the  members  of  the  federal 
judiciary  should  be  appointed  by  the  two  branches  of  the 
government  that  had  no  immediate  contact  with  the  voters, 
the  President  and  the  Senate,  and  that  the  appointment 
should  be  virtually  for  life.  Arthur  Lee,  among  others, 
confidently  predicted  that  from  such  a  system  "an  oligarchy" 
would  arise  and  govern  the  country  to  its  will. 

The  influential  leaders  who  came  into  power  under  the 
new  instrument  were  bent  upon  giving  a  distinctively  aristo 
cratic  cast  to  the  government  that  was  thus  set  in  motion. 
The  guiding  genius  of  the  new  regime,  Alexander  Hamilton, 
freely  admitted  to  his  intimates  that  the  Constitution  was 
imperfect  to  the  extent  that  it  fell  short  of  a  constitutional 
monarchy  but  that  he  intended  to  do  what  he  could  "to  prop 
the  frail  and  worthless  fabric."  Jefferson  tells  us  that  when 
he  arrived  at  the  capital  in  1790  from  France  to  take  his  post 


82    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

as  Secretary  of  State,  "I  found  a  state  of  things,  in  the 
general  society  of  the  place,  which  I  could  not  have  supposed 
possible.  Being  a  stranger  there,  I  was  feasted  from  table 
to  table,  at  large  set  dinners,  the  parties  generally  from 
twenty  to  thirty.  The  revolution  I  had  left,  and  that  we 
had  just  gone  through  in  the  recent  change  of  our  govern 
ment,  being  the  common  topics  of  conversation,  I  was 
astonished  to  find  the  general  prevalence  of  monarchical 
sentiments,  insomuch  that  in  maintaining  those  of  repub 
licanism,  I  had  always  the  whole  company  on  my  hands, 
never  scarcely  finding  among  them  a  single  co-advocate  in 
that  argument.  .  .  .  The  furthest  that  any  one  would  go,  in 
support  of  the  republican  features  of  our  new  government, 
would  be  to  say,  'the  present  Constitution  is  well  as  a  begin 
ning,  and  may  be  allowed  a  fair  trial ;  but  it  is,  in  fact,  only  a 
stepping-stone  to  something  better/  " 

One  of  the  early  concerns  of  the  Hamiltonian  group  was 
to  attempt  to  invest  the  president  with  the  trappings  and 
ceremonials  of  European  monarchy.  The  Senate  labored 
painstakingly  at  the  task  of  discovering  an  appropriate  title 
for  the  chief  executive,  deciding  at  one  time  on  "Elective 
Majesty"  and  again  on  "His  Highness,  the  President  of  the 
United  States  of  America,  and  Protector  of  their  Liberties." 
Only  the  obduracy  of  the  popular  branch  prevented  the  offi 
cial  adoption  of  a  title ;  and  subsequent  efforts  took  on  more 
subtle  forms  perforce.  Thus,  Hamilton's  newspaper  organ, 
the  Gazette  of  the  United  States,  was  in  the  habit  of  treating 
official  functions  after  this  style:  "The  principal  ladies  of 
the  city  have  with  the  earliest  attention  and  respect  paid  their 
devoirs  to  the  amiable  consort  of  our  beloved  president, 
namely,  the  Lady  of  his  Excellency  the  Governor,  Lady 
Stirling,  Lady  Mary  Watts,  Lady  Kitty  Duer,  La  Marchi 
oness  de  Brehan,  the  ladies  of  the  Most  Honorable  Mr. 
Layton,  the  Most  Honorable  Mr.  Dalton,  the  Mayoress,  Mrs. 


DECLINE  OF  ARISTOCRACY  IN  AMERICA      83 

Livingston  of  Clermont,  Lady  Temple  .  .  .  and  a  large 
number  of  other  respectable  characters."  After  the  fashion 
of  European  monarchs,  the  president  gave  formal  weekly 
levees  to  an  invited  list  of  guests;  and  it  is  said  that  when 
Mrs.  Washington  found  a  trace  of  dirt  on  her  wall  after  one 
of  the  receptions,  she  exclaimed  angrily:  "It  was  no  Fed 
eralist;  none  but  a  filthy  Democrat  would  mark  a  place  on 
the  wall  with  his  good-for-nothing  head  in  that  manner." 

The  democratic  spirit  of  revolutionary  times  was  subdued 
but,  as  events  were  to  show,  not  conquered.  Indeed,  while 
the  Federalists  were  still  in  the  full  sway  of  their  power, 
aristocracy,  was  being  insidiously  attacked  in  some  of  its 
supports  through  changes  in  state  constitutions  decreeing 
the  separation  of  church  and  state.  The  Anglican  Church 
had  been  disestablished  in  Virginia  as  early  as  1778.  During 
the  Federalist  regime,  most  of  the  states  abolished  religious 
qualifications  for  voting  and  office-holding.  In  national  poli 
tics  a  political  party  was  being  formed  by  Jefferson  and 
Madison  who  made  all  possible  capital  out  of  the  aristocratic 
tendencies  of  the  Federalists,  calling  them  "monocrats," 
"monarchists"  and  "Anglomaniacs."  The  latter  retaliated  by 
calling  the  opposition  party  by  the  opprobrious  name  of 
"democrats." 

The  government  of  wealth  and  intelligence,  as  carried  on 
by  the  Federalists,  bore  fruit  in  an  unparalleled  crop  of 
constructive  legislation  under  Washington  and  Adams;  but 
the  general  opinion  that  many  of  these  laws  were  despotic 
and  designed  primarily  for  the  welfare  of  the  ruling  class 
aroused  a  popular  clamor  that  made  inevitable  their  dismissal 
from  the  seats  of  authority. 

in 

In  1 80 1  a  new  period  opened  in  the  history  of  aristocracy 
in  America  with  the  accession  of  the  JefTersonian  Re- 


84    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

publicans  to  power.  The  event  was  hailed  by  the  Republicans 
as  a  return  to  the  principles  for  which  the  War  for  Indepen 
dence  had  been  fought.  "The  Revolution  of  1776  is  com 
plete"  was  their  exultant  cry.  But  the  Federalists  stood 
aghast  at  the  disaster  which  they  believed  had  befallen  their 
country.  Theodore  Dwight  of  Connecticut  asserted  in  a 
Fourth  of  July  oration  that  the  great  object  of  democracy 
was  "to  destroy  every  trace  of  civilization  in  the  world,  and 
force  mankind  back  into  a  savage  state.  .  .  .  We  have 
a  country  governed  by  blockheads  and  knaves;  the  ties  of 
marriage  with  all  its  felicities  are  severed  and  destroyed; 
our  wives  and  daughters  are  thrown  into  the  stews;  our 
children  are  cast  into  the  world  from  the  breast  and  are 
forgotten.  .  .  .  Can  the  imagination  paint  anything  more 
dreadful  this  side  of  hell?"  Cabot,  a  Massachusetts  leader, 
declared  that  by  democracy  was  meant  "the  government  of 
the  worst."  Both  Hamilton  and  Rufus  King  apprehended  "a 
bloody  anarchy"  as  the  consequence  of  the  leveling  tenden 
cies  of  the  times;  and  Henry  Cabot  Lodge  tells  us  in  his 
biography  of  the  former  that  the  reason  Hamilton  accepted 
Burr's  challenge  to  the  fatal  duel  was  because  he  desired  to 
keep  himself  available  for  military  leadership  in  the  struggle 
for  the  establishment  of  law  and  order,  which  he  regarded  as 
the  inevitable  outcome  of  government  by  Jefferson's  rabble. 
But  Jeffersonian  democracy  did  not,  as  a  matter  of  fact, 
cause  the  doom  of  the  caste  principle  in  American  society 
and  government.  On  the  contrary,  it  perpetuated  it  in  a 
more  enlightened  and  less  offensive  form.  In  the  retrospect 
of  history  it  is  clear  that  political  power  had  shifted  from  a 
mercantile  aristocracy  built  on  English  models  tc  a  landed 
aristocracy  fully  acclimated  to  the  American  environment. 
The  great  planters  of  the  South  supplied  the  atmosphere  of 
gentility  in  which  the  federal  administration  at  Washington 
moved  and  had  its  being;  and  the  presidency  for  six  admin- 


DECLINE  OF  ARISTOCRACY  IN  AMERICA      85 

istrations  fell,  almost  as  a  matter  of  right,  to  a  line  of 
succession  known  as  the  "Virginia  Dynasty."  From  the 
viewpoint  of  subsequent  progress  toward  democracy, 
"Jeffersonian  aristocracy"  seems  the  appropriate  term  to 
employ,  for  the  mass  of  the  people  still  continued  very  largely 
as  spectators  of  events. 

The  philosophical  outlook  of  the  new  aristocracy  was,  to 
be  sure,  quite  different  from  the  old.  Where  the  latter  had 
regarded  itself  as  fashioning  public  policy  in  the  interests  of 
the  superior  class,  the  former  prided  itself  as  functioning  as 
the  guardian  and  protector  of  the  masses.  Yet,  whatever 
its  professions  may  have  been,  the  new  aristocracy  was 
moved  rather  by  a  lofty  spirit  of  public  service  and  a  sense  of 
noblesse  oblige  than  by  an  unfaltering  acceptance  of  demo 
cratic  dogma.  Thus,  while  subscribing  to  the  theory  of 
manhood  suffrage  and  of  free,  public  education,  Jefferson 
and  his  friends  took  no  very  energetic  part  in  hastening  their 
adoption.  They  did  indeed  introduce  a  more  democratic 
spirit  into  the  system  provided  for  electing  the  president,  by 
seeing  to  it  that  the  presidential  electors  merely  registered  the 
will  of  the  voters;  but  they  deliberately  ignored  the  oppor 
tunity  of  dispensing  with  the  electoral  system  in  its  entirety 
when  they  adopted  the  twelfth  amendment  (1804). 

On  the  other  hand,  the  Jeffersonian  aristocracy  discarded 
much  of  the  formalism  and  ostentation  of  the  Federalist 
regime,  and  with  it  went  the  cynical  contempt  of  the  innate 
capacity  of  the  people  to  govern  themselves.  "Jeffersonian 
simplicity"  became  a  byword  and  a  rule  of  conduct.  The 
new  president  refused  to  avail  himself  of  the  customary 
coach  and  four  and  walked  quietly  from  his  boarding-house 
to  the  capitol  to  take  the  oath  of  office.  He  dispensed  with 
the  official  rules  of  etiquette,  which  Hamilton  had  drawn  up, 
and  introduced  the  custom  of  public  receptions  open  to  any 
one  who  might  wish  to  attend.  The  House  of  Representa- 


86    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

tives  granted  better  facilities  for  newspaper  reporters;  and 
the  Senate  began  to  hold  public  sessions  and  employed  a 
stenographer  to  record  its  debates. 

Thus  "Jeffersonian  democracy,"  as  a  term  descriptive  of 
American  social  ideals  during  the  period  from  1801  to  the 
defeat  of  John  Quincy  Adams  in  1828,  meant  no  panacea  for 
the  people  who  had  hitherto  been  excluded  from  the  full 
enjoyment  of  the  opportunities  of  American  life.  The  mass 
of  the  white  population  in  the  East  discovered  little  change 
for  the  better  in  their  political  and  civil  status  although 
federal  policy  was  molded  chiefly  with  an  eye  to  their  good, 
and  the  abundance  of  good  lands  in  the  interior  continued  to 
insure  their  material  well-being.  However,  in  the  northern 
half  of  the  country,  negro  serfdom  was  being  abolished  by 
provisions  for  gradual  emancipation;  and  in  the  Northwest, 
the  foundations  were  being  laid  for  a  free  elementary  school 
system. 

IV 

This  genial  aristocracy  was  not  long  to  hold  its  place 
unchallenged  by  the  less  fortunate  classes.  While  its  mem 
bers  were  yet  engaged  in  passing  about  the  higher  offices  of 
the  land  among  themselves,  fundamental  changes  beneath 
"the  surface  of  American  life  were  beginning  to  undermine 
their  position.  In  the  West,  the  frontier  states  were  dis 
playing  a  hearty  disrespect  for  the  wisdom  of  their  betters 
by  granting  universal  white  manhood  suffrage  and  abolishing 
special  qualifications  for  office-holding.  In  the  newly- 
established  factory  centers  of  New  England  and  the  Middle 
states,  the  workingmen  were  rebelling  against  the  hampering 
and  unsanitary  conditions  under  which  they  were  obliged  to 
labor,  and  were  insistently  demanding  equal  political  rights 
and  the  establishment  of  a  public  school  system.  Everywhere 
immigrants  from  the  Old  World  joined  their  voices  in  the 


DECLINE  OF  ARISTOCRACY  IN  AMERICA      87 

swelling  chorus  for  the  diminution  of  aristocratic  privilege. 
A  movement  of  irresistible  momentum  got  under  way  for 
the  extension  of  political  rights  to  all  white  men  regardless  of 
their  fitness  or  their  property  rating;  so  that  by  1821,  fifteen 
of  the  twenty-four  commonwealths  possessed  white  manhood 
suffrage,  absolute  or  virtual. 

Confronted  with  the  realistic  results  of  Jefferson's  theo 
retical  attachment  to  manhood  suffrage,  the  fine  old  person 
ages,  many  of  whom  had  been  young  men  when  Jefferson 
entered  the  presidency,  condemned  and  opposed  with  utmost 
bitterness  the  impending  vulgarization  of  politics.  Daniel 
Webster  and  Justice  Story  united  with  the  venerable  John 
Adams  in  resisting  the  change  in  Massachusetts.  In  New 
York  the  justly  renowned  Chancellor  Kent  declared  to  the 
state  constitutional  convention  that  "Universal  suffrage 
jeopardizes  property  and  puts  it  into  the  power  of  the  poor 
and  the  profligate  to  control  the  affluent.  Shall  every  de 
partment  of  the  government  be  at  the  disposal  of  those  who 
are  ignorant  of  the  importance  and  nature  of  the  right  they 
are  authorized  to  assume  ?  The  poor  man's  interest  is  always 
in  opposition  to  his  duty,  and  it  is  too  much  to  expect  of 
human  nature  that  interest  will  not  be  consulted."  In  Vir 
ginia,  the  contest  for  equal  political  rights  for  white  men 
was  only  partially  successful  (1830)  because  of  the  opposi 
tion  of  John  Marshall,  James  Madison  and  John  Randolph, 
three  ancient  antagonists  in  politics  who  now  made  common 
cause  for  their  order  and  succeeded  in  excluding  fifty 
thousand  white  men  from  the  franchise  for  a  period  of 
twenty  years  more.  So  stubborn  in  Rhode  Island  was  the 
resistance  of  those  who  wished  to  maintain  the  status  quo 
that,  after  twenty  years  of  wrangling,  Dorr's  rebellion  was 
necessary  to  effect  a  liberalization  of  the  suffrage. 

The  control  of  the  federal  government  could  not  long 
remain  in  the  accustomed  hands  when  leveling  tendencies 


88    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

were  sweeping  aside  the  barriers  of  suffrage.  Portents  of 
the  impending  subversion  were  all  too  apparent  to  the 
decorous  gentlemen  of  the  age.  Salmon  P.  Chase,  then  a 
young  law  student  in  Washington,  relates  that  the  bi-weekly 
levees  of  President  John  Quincy  Adams  were  always 
crowded  to  excess,  and  that  at  the  New  Year's  reception, 
1827,  the  guests  became  so  unruly  in  their  eagerness  to 
secure  refreshments  that  they  pushed  the  attendant  over. 
On  the  same  occasion,  a  hat  belonging  to  a  Delaware  Con 
gressman  was  stolen,  which  caused  Chase  to  remark  lacon 
ically:  "Something  of  this  kind  almost  always  occurs  and 
those  who  attend  would  do  well  to  wear  the  poorest  articles 
they  have,  that  their  value  may  not  tempt  the  honesty  of 
others."  Even  more  disturbing  to  polite  society  at  the  capi 
tal,  so  Chase  reported,  was  the  news  that  the  brother-in-law 
of  one  of  the  president's  sons  had  married  his  sister's  serving- 
maid! 

The  elevation  of  the  backwoodsman  Andrew  Jackson  to 
the  presidency  in  1829  was  a  dramatic  symbol  of  the  success 
of  the  disintegrating  forces  of  the  time.  The  men  of  qual 
ity  and  wealth  who  had  dominated  the  public  service  for  so 
many  years  were  left  with  no  alternative  but  to  execute  as 
dignified  a  retreat  as  possible.  "As  they  cannot  occupy  in 
public  a  position  equivalent  to  what  they  hold  in  private 
life,"  observed  the  Frenchman,  Alexis  de  Tocqueville,  who 
visited  America  at  this  time,  "they  abandon  the  former,  and 
give  themselves  up  to  the  latter ;  and  they  constitute  a  private 
society  in  the  state,  which  has  its  own  tastes  and  pleasures." 
The  seats  of  the  government  became,  for  the  first  time,  filled 
with  men  whom  the  people  had  elected,  not  because  the 
officials  were  superior  to  the  multitude  but  because  they  were 
so  like  them.  The  taint  of  aristocracy  now  became  as  defi 
nite  an  obstacle  to  political  preferment  as  a  suspicion  of 
democratic  sympathies  once  had  been.  The  fact  that  Martin 


DECLINE  OF  ARISTOCRACY  IN  AMERICA      89 

Van  Buren  used  goldware  and  had  installed  a  billiard-table 
in  the  White  House  was  a  serious  campaign  issue  in  1840; 
and  the  object  of  every  astute  candidate  was  to  convince  the 
voters  that  he  was  only  a  plain  and  democratic  citizen. 
Daniel  Webster  apologized  publicly  because  he  had  not  been 
born  in  a  log-cabin  but  eagerly  claimed  that  distinction  for 
his  elder  brother  and  sisters.  "If  ever  I  am  ashamed  of  it," 
he  solemnly  averred,  "may  my  name  and  the  name  of  my 
posterity  be  blotted  from  the  memory  of  mankind !" 

The  overthrow  of  the  forces  of  aristocracy  in  the  arena 
of  politics  was  accompanied  by  attacks  on  their  prerogative 
in  other  fields  hitherto  monopolized  by  them.  It  is  extremely 
significant  that  all  class  distinctions  in  matters  of  dress  dis 
appeared  at  this  time.  All  men  began  to  wear  the  homely 
garb  and  short-cropped  hair  that  had  been  the  distinguishing 
mark  of  servants  and  day-laborers  in  colonial  times.  James 
Monroe  had  been  the  last  president  to  affect  the  stately 
colonial  costume;  and  in  Connecticut  it  was  observed  that 
after  the  democratic  victory  in  1818  public  officials  ceased  to 
wear  the  formal  attire  of  earlier  times.  Elsewhere  the 
courtly  dress  of  colonial  days  had  survived  longer. 

The  exclusive  position  of  the  aristocratic  class  was  chal 
lenged  at  another  point :  a  concerted  effort  was  made  in  the 
second  quarter  of  the  century  to  drag  down  education  to  the 
level  of  the  crowd.  The  principle  of  free  education  sup 
ported  by  public  taxation  had  long  been  recognized  in  New 
England  and  the  Northwest  although  the  practice  had  fallen 
sadly  short  of  the  theory ;  but  in  the  few  other  places  where 
free  schools  were  maintained,  they  were  regarded  as  char 
itable  institutions  for  pauper  children,  the  instruction  offered 
being  extremely  rudimentary.  The  demand  for  equal  edu 
cation  at  the  government's  expense  grew  out  of  labor  agita 
tion  in  New  York  and  Pennsylvania  in  the  twenties  and  the 
thirties ;  and  it  aroused  the  same  feelings  of  disapproval  and 


90    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

indignation  in  the  ranks  of  the  aristocracy  as  did  the  agita 
tion  for  manhood  suffrage.  The  National  Gazette  of  Phila 
delphia  denounced  the  scheme  as  "virtually  Agrarianism.  It 
would  be  a  compulsory  application  of  the  means  of  the  richer 
for  the  direct  use  of  the  poorer  classes ;  and  so  far  an  arbi 
trary  division  of  property  among  them."  The  editor  further 
pointed  out  that  "The  peasant  must  labor  during  those  hours 
of  the  day  which  his  wealthy  neighbor  can  give  to  abstract 
culture  of  his  mind;  otherwise,  the  earth  would  not  yield 
enough  for  the  subsistence  of  all:  the  mechanic  cannot 
abandon  the  operations  of  his  trade,  for  general  studies;  if 
he  should,  most  of  the  conveniences  of  life  .  .  .  would  be 
wanting;  languor,  decay,  poverty,  discontent  would  soon  be 
visible  among  all  classes." 

But  the  tide  of  popular  demand  was  not  to  be  stemmed. 
By  the  decade  of  the  forties,  free  public  schools  were  com 
mon  throughout  the  North,  and  the  notion  that  the  common 
people  needed  merely  the  elements  of  education  was  aban 
doned  for  the  ideal  of  equal  educational  opportunities  for  all 
classes.  Only  in  the  South  were  the  landed  gentry  success 
ful  in  maintaining  the  monopoly  of  educational  advantages 
that  their  wealth  and  social  position  assured  to  them. 

Notwithstanding  the  irreparable  losses  suffered  by  the 
aristocracy  as  a  result  of  the  upheavals  from  below,  the  caste 
idea  founded  sources  of  rejuvenation  in  certain  other  aspects 
of  American  development  before  the  Civil  War.  On  the 
broad  basis  of  African  slavery  the  southerners  had  already 
in  colonial  times  perfected  a  semi- feudal  order  of  exclusive 
manners  comparable  to  the  age-long  aristocracies  of  Europe. 
The  vast  expansion  of  cotton  culture  from  1800  to  1830 
gave  a  new  dignity  and  importance  to  this  high-toned  gentry. 
The  few  thousands  of  "first  families,"  who  lived  upon  the 
incomes  of  plantations  and  formed  the  upper-crust  of 
southern  society,  spent  their  winters  in  New  Orleans,  their 


DECLINE  OF  ARISTOCRACY  IN  AMERICA      91 

springs  in  Charleston  and  their  summers  at  the  Virginia 
springs.  Every  gentleman  had  his  valet,  every  lady  her 
maid;  tutors  were  employed  to  train  their  children.  The 
personal  ideal  of  this  aristocracy  was  summed  up  in  the  term 
"chivalry,"  an  expression  denoting  the  virtues  of  gallantry 
toward  women,  courtesy  to  inferiors,  a  mettlesome  sense  of 
honor,  and  a  lavish  hospitality.  On  all  appropriate  occa 
sions  the  southerners  openly  declared  the  failure  of  demo 
cratic  government  and  were  at  one  with  the  renowned 
Chancellor  Harper  of  South  Carolina  in  scorning  the  glitter 
ing  generalities  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence. 

Forming  the  governing  class  of  the  South — for  Jacksonian 
democracy  had  never  disturbed  their  seats  of  power  within 
the  borders  of  their  own  states — they  looked  upon  themselves 
as  prepared  by  training,  temperament  and  interest  to  guide 
the  destinies  of  the  federal  government.  Their  cultivation 
of  the  arts  of  leisure  gave  them  a  decided  advantage  in  the 
science  of  statecraft  over  the  rough-and-ready  political 
organizers  of  the  North.  Yet  the  circumstances  of  the 
times  were  such  that  no  southern  aristocrat  could  ever  expect 
to  occupy  the  presidency  again ;  and  the  planting  class  had  to 
employ  as  their  instruments  in  the  presidency  and  many 
other  high  offices  men  of  the  democratic  North  whom  they 
could  in  no  measure  accept  as  their  social  equals.  Their 
direct  personal  participation  was  confined  to  membership  in 
the  House  and  the  Senate  and  to  various  appointive  offices. 

In  the  North  at  the  same  time  a  pretentious  aristocracy 
was  rapidly  establishing  itself  socially,  confined  largely  to  the 
great  cities  of  the  Atlantic  seaboard.  Men  of  that  section 
who  had  made  money  out  of  land  speculation  and  the  nascent 
manufacturing  industries  were  beginning  to  coalesce  into  a 
special  caste  although  as  yet  there  were  few  millionaires  to 
be  found  among  their  number  outside  of  the  Astors,  the 
Girards  and  the  Longworthys.  Distinguished  visitors  in 


92    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

America  became  aware  of  the  growing  importance  of  social 
distinctions.  The  English  historian,  Harriet  Martineau,  was 
told  much  about  the  "first  people"  of  Boston,  New  York  and 
Philadelphia  when  she  visited  the  United  States  in  the 
thirties;  and  in  the  last  named  city  she  discovered  a  sharp 
social  cleavage  between  the  ladies  of  Arch  Street  whose 
fathers  had  made  their  own  fortunes  and  the  social  leaders 
of  Chestnut  Street  who  owed  their  wealth  to  their  grand 
fathers.  Compared  with  the  corresponding  social  class  in 
the  South,  the  upper  stratum  of  northern  society  constituted 
an  upstart  aristocracy,  based  upon  fluid  capital  rather  than 
upon  land,  and  destitute  of  traditions  or  culture  or  negro 
vassals.  Contemned  by  the  southern  patricians  as  nouveaux 
riches,  this  aspiring  group  were  destined  to  be  the  forerun 
ners  of  the  class  that  was  to  supplant  the  southern  aristocracy 
in  the  period  after  the  Civil  War  and  become  the  modern 
conservators  of  the  aristocratic  tradition. 

Thus,  by  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century,  the  well 
born  in  America  had  lost  their  proprietorship  of  the  govern 
ment,  they  had  in  large  degree  lost  their  monopoly  of  educa 
tion,  and,  finally,  they  had  even  lost  their  clothes.  As  if  the 
cup  of  humiliation  were  not  already  running  over,  a  new 
blow  was  being  prepared  for  the  subversion  of  the  securely- 
established  aristocracy  of  the  South.  The  story  is  a  familiar 
one  and  need  not  be  retold  here.  The  ownership  of  slaves 
was  an  unmistakable  badge  of  social  superiority  and  pre 
sumably  the  pillar  upon  which  southern  wealth  and  culture 
rested.  Chancellor  Harper  was  but  expressing  the  common 
opinion  of  the  southern  gentry  when  he  declared  that  with 
out  slavery  "there  can  be  no  accumulation  of  property,  no 
providence  for  the  future,  no  tastes  for  comfort  or  elegancies, 
which  are  the  characteristics  and  essentials  of  civilization," 
and  that  opposition  to  the  institution  came  from  men  "whose 
precipitate  and  ignorant  zeal  would  overturn  the  fundamental 


DECLINE  OF  ARISTOCRACY  IN  AMERICA      93 

institutions  of  society,  uproar  its  peace  and  endanger  its 
security,  in  pursuit  of  a  distant  and  shadowy  good  .  .  .  ." 
Therefore  when  the  party  of  "precipitate  and  ignorant  zeal" 
elected  their  candidate,  Abraham  Lincoln,  president  01  the 
United  States  in  1860,  separation  from  such  an  unhallowed 
association  seemed  to  be  the  only  reasonable  course  to  adopt. 
The  Civil  War  dealt  a  body  blow  to  the  most  exclusive 
aristocracy  our  country  has  ever  known.  The  former  mas 
ter  class  issued  from  the  conflict  with  the  stigma  of  unsucr 
cessful  revolutionists ;  they  had  lost  the  flower  of  their 
manhood  and  most  of  their  wealth ;  they  had  lost  their  slaves 
and,  for  a  space  of  time,  their  political  equality  in  the  Union. 
The  slaves  emerged  from  the  conflict  at  first  as  freedmen 
possessing  undefined  rights,  then  as  citizens  with  all  the  legal 
rights  of  whites,  and  quickly  thereafter  the  male  negroes 
were  endowed  with  the  right  of  suffrage.  But  the  aristoc 
racy  of  the  old  South,  which  had  played  so  large  a  part  in 
the  history  of  the  nation  and  had  produced  many  of  its 
greatest  men,  was  annihilated,  to  live  no  more  except  as  a 
splendid  and  romantic  memory  of  the  days  "before  the  war." 


By  1870  the  impartial  historian  must  record  that  aristoc 
racy  in  America  appeared  to  have  reached  the  nadir  of  its 
decline.  The  confident  assurance  of  the  Fathers  of  1776 
that  "all  men  are  created  equal"  had  at  last  become  embodied 
in  the  law  of  the  land,  if  by  the  word  "men"  were  under 
stood  "males."  The  principle  of  equality  had  been  intro 
duced  into  political  participation,  into  religion,  into  educa 
tion,  and  into  social  relationships  generally.  The  Home 
stead  Act  of  1862  had  opened  the  public  lands  upon  more 
generous  terms  than  ever  before;  and  hence  political  equality- 
for  men  was  coupled  with  a  virtual  equality  of  economic 
opportunity.  The  women  formed  the  only  element  of  the 


94    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

population  whose  rights  and  privileges  were  distinctly  in 
ferior  to  those  of  the  rest  of  the  people. 

But  devotees  of  the  aristocratic  tradition  had  no  real  occa 
sion  for  despair.  As  a  social  institution,  aristocracy  has 
chameleon-like  qualities  and  takes  its  color  and  form  from 
each  new  situation  in  which  it  may  find  itself.  Though 
individual  aristocrats  may  lose  prestige  and  position,  the 
caste  idea  never  fails  to  find  new  sources  of  sustenance.  An 
era  of  dynamic  development  occurred  in  the  United  States 
following  the  Civil  War,  which  manifested  itself  in  every 
field  of  economic  endeavor.  The  energetic  captains  of  the 
new  age  found  opportunities  for  the  accumulation  of  wealth 
on  every  hand  —  in  railway  enterprises,  in  all  sorts  of  manu 
facturing  enterprises,  in  unappropriated  natural  resources 
and  public  utilities,  in  stock  manipulation.  The  epoch  of 
colossal  fortunes  dawned  upon  the  country  ;  and  soon  people 
began  to  speak  of  "coal  barons,"  "steel  kings/'  "railroad 
magnates,"  "cattle  kings,"  and  "Napoleons  of  finance."  The 
master  minds  of  the  new  order  used  their  personal  prestige 
and  economic  power  to  establish  their  control  over  the  state 
and  national  governments.  The  political  policies  of  the 
period  from  1870  to  1900  were,  in  great  degree,  fashioned 
to  augment  and  fortify  the  position  of  this  new  power  in 
American  life  through  tariffs,  land  grants,  liberal  charters 
and  franchises,  and  a  laissez  faire  attitude  of  the  government. 

"It  is  useless  for  us  to  protest  that  we  are  demo 
cratic  .  .  .  ,"  wrote  Josiah  Strong  in  1885.  "There  is  among 
us  an  aristocracy  of  recognized  power,  and  that 


4M>£#£  Wfiflllt1  No  heraldry  offends  our  republican  preju 
dices.  Our  ensigns  armorial  are  the  trademark.  Our  laws 
and  customs  recognize  no  noble  titles;  but  men  can  forego 
the  husk  of  a  title  who  possess  the  fat  ears  of  power."  The 
new  aristocracy  was  dubbed  by  its  critics  as  "the  plutocracy" 
since  its  authority  was  based  upon  wealth  rather  than  upon 


DECLINE  OF  ARISTOCRACY  IN  AMERICA      95 

the  heritage  of  birth.  Its  exalted  position  was  enhanced  by 
the  wide  gulf  dividing  it  from  the  great  wage-earning  class 
which  made  its  appearance  simultaneously  with  the  rise  of 
the  new  aristocracy.  Nothing  quite  like  this  toiling  class 
had  been  known  in  American  history  before  either  in  num 
bers  or  circumstances.  The  massing  of  immigrants  on  our 
shores,  and  the  growing  scarcity  and  eventual  disappearance 
of  free  lands  in  the  West,  gave  an  unprecedented  fierceness 
to  the  problem  of  making  a  living  and  tended  to  drive  the 
workingmen  onto  a  plane  of  living  where  life  became  a  drab 
existence.  For  such  men  the  forms  of  political  democracy 
remained  as  before;  but  the  substantial  equality  of  wealth 
and  economic  opportunity  of  the  earlier  days  was  fast  dis 
appearing. 

The  finest  spirits  of  the  new  aristocracy  regarded  them 
selves  as  pioneers  of  a  new  kind,  impelled  by  the  creative 
fever  in  their  blood  to  carry  on  the  old  work  of  developing 
the  natural  resources  of  the  nation  under  modern  conditions ; 
and  they  believed  that  the  prosperity  of  the  few  would  even 
tually  penetrate  the  nether  strata  of  society.  Arising  out  of 
the  ranks  of  the  people,  the  members  of  this  new  order 
lacked  the  culture  and  traditions  and  tastes  of  a  long- 
established  aristocracy — but  they  believed  that  all  these  re 
finements  might  be  bought  for  a  price.  Occupied  themselves 
with  the  sterner  realities  of  wealth-production,  the  men  good- 
humoredly  left  to  their  womenfolk  the  responsibility  of 
creating  a  fitting  social  atmosphere  to  gild  the  new  order. 

To  this  end  no  stone  was  left  unturned  or  dollar  unspent. 
In  the  generation  following  the  Civil  War,  playgrounds  of 
the  rich  began  to  appear  overnight  along  the  Atlantic  sea 
board  ;  international  marriages  became  the  goal  of  ambitious 
mothers ;  palatial  mansions  and  liveried  retinues  were  recog 
nized  as  the  accustomed  symbols  of  the  new  superiority.  As 
the  first  generation  grew  older  and  the  second  generation 


96    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

began  to  come  of  age,  the  new  regime  began  to  feel  its  social 
position  firmly  established,  its  newness  worn  off;  and  its 
efforts  at  ostentation,  though  no  less  carefully  sustained, 
became  less  frantic.  Thus  it  happened  that  the  second  and 
the  third  generations  were  able  to  found  a  genuine  leisure 
class  with  the  prodigality  and  profligacy  that  attends  such  a 
mode  of  existence.  Natural  refinements  began  to  grace  the 
life  of  the  "exclusive  set";  and  with  the  development  of  a 
sense  of  richest e  oblige,  men  of  wealth  became  the  patrons 
of  libraries,  art  galleries,  scientific  organizations,  and  impov 
erished  colleges. 

But  the  new  order  of  things  did  not  remain  without  oppo 
sition  from  the  less  fortunate  classes.  To  be  sure,  the  social 
pre-eminence  of  the  plutocracy  could  not,  with  any  degree  of 
effectiveness,  be  disputed  or  prevented,  but  the  sources  of 
its  economic  and  political  predominance  presented  vulnerable 
points  of  attack.  Disgruntled  groups  of  the  plain  people, 
farmers  in  the  West  and  workingmen  in  the  cities,  began  to 
make  their  voices  heard  in  protest  against  what  they  called 
"Specif  Privilege"  and  "Vested  Interests,"  and  to  urge  that 
the  government  use  its  power  to  demolish  the  foundations  of 
the  superstructure  upon  which  Plutocracy  rested.  The 
monied  aristocracy  was  no  more  inclined  to  yield  to  leveling 
tendencies  than  had  been  its  prototypes  in  the  earlier  days 
of  the  republic.  "This  country  has  been  developed  by  a 
wonderful  people,  flush  with  enthusiasm,  imagination  and 
speculation  bent  .  .  ."  declared  E.  H.  Harriman,  the  organ 
izing  genius  of  twenty  thousand  miles  of  railroad.  "Stifle 
that  enthusiasm,  deaden  that  imagination  and  prohibit  that 
speculation  by  restrictive  and  cramping  conservative  law, 
and  you  tend  to  produce  a  moribund  and  conservative  people 
and  country."  In  a  more  exalted  strain  George  F.  Baer, 
president  of  the  Philadelphia  and  Reading  Railroad,  entered 
his  classic  defense  of  the  ascendant  class  as  "tha  Christian 


DECLINE  OF  ARISTOCRACY  IN  AMERICA      97 

men  to  whom  God,  in  His  infinite  wisdom,  has  given  the 
control  of  the  property  interests  of  the  country." 

Meantime,  the  popular  movement  against  plutocratic  con 
trol  continued  to  gain  in  volume  and  volubility ;  and  by  1900 
the  people  generally  were  aroused  to  the  point  of  taking  swift 
and  drastic  measures.  Since  that  time  their  chief  energy  has 
been  directed  toward  restoring  that  equality  of  opportunity 
which  had  characterized  the  days  of  the  undeveloped  frontier 
and  without  which  they  regarded  political  democracy  as 
devoid  of  meaning.  Proposing  to  destroy  the  alliance  of 
political  bosses  and  the  plutocracy,  the  popular  leaders  pre 
vailed  upon  the  state  legislatures  to  pass  corrupt  practices 
laws,  to  establish  systems  of  direct  nominations  and  to  insure 
popular  sanction  of  legislation  through  the  initiative  and 
referendum.  These  measures  were  followed  in  1913  by  the 
establishment  of  a  new  method  of  electing  United  States 
senators — by  direct  vote  of  the  people.  The  impracticable 
and  dangerous  character  of  all  these  proposals  were  elo 
quently  portrayed  by  the  men  of  wealth  and  position,  but  to 
no  avail.  The  national  government  was  also  forced  to  yield 
to  the  popular  clamor ;  and,  in  conjunction  with  the  state 
governments,  laws  were  passed  to  regulate  the  business  prac 
tices  of  railroads  and  industrial  corporations,  to  conserve  our 
natural  resources,  and  to  improve  the  conditions  of  the  labor 
ing  class.  The  unequal  distribution  of  wealth  was  another 
subject  for  legislation;  and  acts  have  been  passed  for  im 
posing  graduated  taxes  on  large  incomes,  inheritances  and 
excess  business  profits. 

These  laws,  disconcerting  and  disrupting  as  they  are  in  the 
judgment  of  the  aristocracy,  do  not  involve  a  complete 
annihilation  of  its  special  privileges,  for  many  of  these  privi 
leges  were  granted  in  terms  and  under  circumstances  that 
make  their  revocation  an  impossibility.  The  most  funda 
mental  menace  to  the  continuance  of  the  privileged  class 


98    NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

is  found  in  the  increasing  self -consciousness  and  self- 
assertion  of  the  laboring  class.  The  great  labor  organiza 
tions  are  seeking,  by  means  of  collective  bargaining  and  the 
strike,  to  introduce  the  principles  of  political  democracy  into 
the  management  of  industry.  Their  aspiration  has  received 
high  sanction  in  a  message  of  President  Wilson,  who  declared 
on  May  20,  1919,  his  endorsement  of  a  "genuine  democrati 
zation  of  industry  based  upon  a  full  recognition  of  the  right 
of  those  who  work  ...  to  participate  in  some  organic  way 
in  every  decision  which  directly  affects  their  welfare  or  the 
part  they  are  to  play  in  industry."  Should  this  tendency 
work  out  to  its  logical  conclusion,  industrial  magnates  will 
find  themselves  forced  to  yield  control  over  their  own  busi 
ness  enterprises  and  be  reduced  to  the  status  of  partners, 
perhaps  silent  ones,  with  their  own  employees.  A  remoter 
peril  is  held  forth  in  the  equalitarian  program  of  those  radi 
cal  laborites  who  maintain  that  private  profits  should  be 
abolished,  and  that  all  industry  should  be  "socialized"  with 
complete  control  in  the  hands  of  the  workers. 

The  warfare  against  aristocracy  during  the  years  since  the 
Civil  War  concerned  itself  also  with  the  inferior  position 
which  woman  occupied  in  American  society.  The  chief  con 
tenders  for  the  abolition  of  artificial  sex  distinctions  were 
members  of  the  subordinate  class ;  and  each  decade  saw  new 
inroads  made  on  the  exclusive  position  held  from  time  imme 
morial  by  the  male  members  of  society.  Susan  B.  Anthony, 
the  great  leader  in  the  movement  for  sex  equality,  made  the 
issue  clear  in  1873  when  she  said  that,  for  women,  "this 
government  is  not  a  democracy.  It  is  not  a  republic.  It  is 
an  odious  aristocracy.  .  .  .  Surely  this  oligarchy  of  sex, 
which  makes  the  men  of  every  household  sovereigns,  masters 
.  .  .  can  not  be  endured."  The  leaders  of  the  privileged  sex 
repeatedly  pointed  out  the  dangers  which  any  lowering  of  the 


DECLINE  OF  ARISTOCRACY  IN  AMERICA      99 

sex  barriers  would  involve — that  woman  would  lose  her 
charm  and  forfeit  the  respect  of  man,  that  equalization  of  the 
sexes  would  lead  to  the  breaking-up  of  family  life,  that 
the  feminine  mentality  was  unfitted  to  cope  with  public 
questions.  Behind  these  arguments  lay  the  deep-seated  con 
viction  of  the  men,  so  a  member  of  the  New  York  constitu 
tional  convention  of  1867  averred,  that  "The  right  of  self- 
government  upon  which  our  whole  superstructure  is  based  is 
in  the  man.  It  has  been  written  by  the  ringer  of  God  him 
self  upon  the  mental  constitution  of  every  human  being  and 
in  such  unmistakable  characters  that  it  is  impossible  for  us  to 
misunderstand,  misinterpret,  or  mistranslate  them."  The 
failure  of  women  to  be  silenced  by  these  arguments  seemed 
to  constitute  added  proof  of  their  irrational  and  emotional 
nature.  Nevertheless,  sex  bars  fell  one  by  one  until  finally, 
in  1920,  the  women  of  the  nation  were  admitted  as  political 
partners  with  the  men  by  an  amendment  to  the  federal  Con 
stitution. 

In  this  veracious  chronicle  of  aristocracy  in  America,  it 
would  be  unfair  not  to  record  one  positive  advance  that  the 
forces  of  privilege  have  made  in  recent  years.  The  status  of 
legal  equality  which,  in  a  moment  of  high  exaltation,  had 
been  thrust  upon  the  southern  negro  by  the  federal  govern 
ment  has  been  quietly  disregarded  by  the  superior  race  of 
that  section ;  and  in  the  period  since  southern  reconstruction, 
the  negro  has  been  reduced  to  a  special  plane  of  his  own,  des 
titute  of  the  vote,  deprived  of  equal  educational  advantages 
and  restrained  by  class  discriminations  from  enjoying  equal 
rights  in  public  carriers  and  places  of  assemblage. 

In  conclusion,  it  may  fairly  be  asked :  what  lesson  is  to  be 
learned  from  the  history  of  aristocracy  in  the  United  States? 
Those  who  are  protagonists  of  the  democratic  ideal  may 


ioo  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

draw  their  own  moral.  For  them  the  fact  of  outstanding 
significance  must  doubtless  be  the  steady  advance  and  even 
tual  conquest  of  democracy  over  all  forms  and  traditions  of 
aristocracy.  But,  however  impressive  this  thought  may  be, 
the  confirmed  aristocrat  need  not  lose  heart.  He  may  always 
expect  the  common  people  to  think  with  Thomas  Jefferson 
that  "the  mass  of  mankind  has  not  been  born  with  saddles 
on  their  backs,  nor  a  favored  few  booted  and  spurred,  ready 
to  ride  them  legitimately,  by  the  grace  of  God" ;  but  if  his 
tory  has  shown  anything,  it  has  demonstrated  that  the  multi 
tude  tend  to  grow  careless  of  their  liberties  and  to  think  in 
terms  of  their  own  generation  rather  than  with  an  eye  to  the 
future.  New  conditions  and  altered  circumstances  of  society 
have,  in  the  past,  rendered  possible  the  creation  of  new  privi 
leges  and  pretensions  for  those  who  were  energetic  and  alert. 
In  the  shortcomings  of  democratic  society,  therefore,  lies  the 
hope  of  the  future  for  the  perpetuation  of  the  aristocratic 
tradition  in  America. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

The  development  and  interrelations  of  aristocracy  and  democracy 
in  the  United  States  have  since  colonial  times  excited  the  intense 
interest  of  countless  numkers  of  foreign  travelers  in  this  country. 
This  is  not  surprising  since  the  United  States  was  for  many  years 
the  great  laboratory  of  democratic  social  and  political  experimenta 
tion  for  the  world.  These  foreign  observers  were  not  merely 
interested  in  democracy  in  the  restricted  sense  of  political  self- 
government  but  also  in  its  broader  social  manifestations.  When 
due  allowance  is  made  for  the  motives  which  brought  the  travelers 
to  our  shores  and  for  their  social  and  political  predispositions,  this 
class  of  literature,  distinguished  by  such  names  as  the  Marquis  de 
Chastellux,  Alexis  de  Tocqueville.  Harriet  Martineau,  James  Bryce 
and  Edward  A.  Freeman,  contains  the  most  penetrating  observations 
that  may  be  found  anywhere  of  the  conflict  of  aristocratic  and 
democratic  ideas  in  American  life  at  the  various  stages  of  our 
history.  A  useful  index  to  this  extensive  literature  for  the  period 
prior  to  the  date  of  its  publication  is  Henry  T.  Tuckerman's 
America  and  her  Commentators  (New  York,  1864) .__ 

Native  Americans  of  the  early  days  of  the  republic  seldom  viewed 
these  contrasting  institutions  objectively  or,  if  they  did,  it  was  with 
some  ulterior  political  purpose  in  mind.  Nevertheless,  such  essays 


DECLINE  OF  ARISTOCRACY  IN  AMERICA    101 

as  the  following,  notwithstanding  their  polemic  purpose,  shed  con 
siderable  light  upon  the  contemporary  conceptions  of  aristocracy  and 
democracy  in  American  history:  John  Adams's  A  Defence  of  the 
Constitutions  of  Government  of  the  United  States  (1787-1788)  and 
his  Discourses  on  Davila  (1790)  ;  John  Taylor's  An  Enquiry  into 
the  Principles  and  Policy  of  the  Government  of  the  United  States 
(1814)  ;  and  John  C.  Calhoun's  A  Disquisition  on  Government  and 
his  A  Discourse  on  the  Constitution  and  Government  of  the  United 
States  (published  posthumously).  C.  Edward  Merriam's  A  History 
of  American  Political  Theories  (New  York,  1910)  offers  incidentally 
an  excellent  sketch  of  the  growth  of  democratic  ideals  in  the  writ 
ings  of  American  statesmen  and  political  philosophers. 

It.  was  not  until  a  quarter  of  a  century  ago  that  American  \ 
students  began  to  single  out  democracy  as  a  theme  for  special 
study  and  treatment,  although  it  is  perhaps  true  to  say  that  no 
history  of  the  United  States  has  ever  been  written  which  is  not, 
however  unconsciously  and  inadequately,  a  running  commentary 
upon  the  expansion  of  political  democracy.  In  1898,  three  works 
appeared  which  were  concerned  with  isolating  the  democratic  trend 
in  American  history  and  studying  it:  Frederick  A.  Cleveland's 
The  Growth  of  Democracy  in  the  United  States  (Chicago),  Francis 
Newton  Thorpe's  Constitutional  History  of  the  American  People, 
1776-1850  (2  v.,  New  York)  ;  and  Bernard  Moses's  Democracy  and 
Social  Growth  in  the  United  States  (New  York).  The  first  two 
of  these  works  were  occupied  very  largely  in  setting  forth  the 
enlargement  of  popular  rights  in  government  and  law ;  and  since 
then  a  number  of  other  studies  have  been  carried  out  along  the 
same  lines,  among  which  may  be  mentioned  :  J.  Allen  Smith's  The 
Spirit  of  American  Government  (New  York,  1907)  ;  Kirk  H. 
Porter's  A  History  of  Suffrage  in  the  United  States  (Chicago, 
1918)  ;  Dixon  Ryan  Fox's  The  Decline  of  Aristocracy  in  the  Politics 
of  New  York  (New  York,  1919)  ;  and  Andrew  Cunningham 
McLaughlin's  Steps  in  the  Development  of  American  Democracy 
(New  York,  1920).  The  volume  by  Professor  Moses  paid  relatively 
more  attention  to  the  social  and  economic  conditions  of  democratic 
development ;  and  this  point  of  view  has  since  then  received  fuller 
treatment  in  such  studies  as  John  Bach  McMaster's  The  Acquisition 
of  the  Political,  Social  and  Industrial  Rights  of  Man  in  America 
(Cleveland,  1903)  ;  Frederick  Jackson  Turner's  "Contributions  of 
the  West  to  American  Democracy"  in  the  Atlantic  Monthly,  vol.  xci 
(1903),  PP-  83-96,  reprinted  in  his  The  Frontier  in  American  His 
tory  (New  York,  1920)  ;  Robert  Tudor  Hill's  The  Public  Domain, 
and  Democracy  (New  York,  1910)  ;  and  Frederick  C.  Howe's  Privi 
lege  and  Democracy  in  America  (New  York,  1910). 

An  adequate  history  of  aristocracy  and  democracy  in  America  is 
yet  to  be  written,  for,  as  the  foregoing  sketch  has  indicated,  these 
social  ideals  have  been  mirrored  not  only  in  government  and  politic 
but  also  in  the  manners  and  customs,  religion  and  education,  ec& 
nomic  organization,  literature  and  thought  of  the  people.  The 
materials  for  compiling  a  comprehensive  account  of  the  decline  of 
aristocracy  will  be  supplied  only  when  a  genuine  social  history  of 


102  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

the  United  States  is  written.  Important  contributions  toward  such 
a  history  have  been  made  by  a  host  of  writers,  among  whom  may 
be  mentioned  John  Bach  McMaster,  Philip  A.  Bruce,  Alice  M.  Earle, 
Henry  A^ams,  E.  D.  Fite,  William  E.  Dodd,  Arthur  W.  Calhoun, 
John  R.  Commons,  and  the  special  writers  on  American  religious 
history  and  the  history  of  literature  and  education  in  the  United 
States.  A  handy  compendium  is  the  book  entitled  Social  and 
Economic  Forces  in  American  History  (New  York,  1913),  composed 
of  chapters  selected  from  the  volumes  of  The  American  Nation:  a 
History  (New  York,  1905-1918).  Very  suggestive  is  Albert  Bush- 
nell  Hart's  volume  National  Ideals  Historically  Traced  (in  The 
American  Nation:  a  History,  vol.  26;  New  York,  1907). 


CHAPTER  V 

RADICALISM  AND  CONSERVATISM   IN  AMERICAN   HISTORY 


The  heated  discussion  conducted  in  recent  years  by  press 
and  platform  on  the  merits  and  demerits  of  radicalism  and 
conservatism  causes  the  student  of  American  history  to 
search  his  mind  concerning  the  effects  of  these  opposing 
types  of  thought  on  the  past  history  of  the  United  States. 
In  such  an  inquiry,  an  initial  difficulty  presents  itself:  what 
do  the  terms, -"conservative"  and  "radical,"  mean?  Popular 
usage  has  tended  to  rob  these  expressions  of  exact  meaning 
and  to  convert  them  into  epithets  of  opprobrium  and  adula 
tion  which  are  used  as  the  bias  or  interest  of  the  person  may 
dictate.  The  conservative,  having  mapped  out  the  confines 
of  truth  to  his  own  satisfaction,  judges  the  depravity  and 
errors  of  the  radical  by  the  extent  of  his  departure  from  the 
boundaries  thus  established.  Likewise  the  radical,  from  his 
vantage-point  of  truth,  measures  the  knavery  and  infirmities 
of  his  opponents  by  the  distance  they  have  yet  to  travel  to 
reach  his  goal.  Neither  conservative  nor  radical  regards  the 
other  with  judicial  calm  or  "sweet  reasonableness."  Neither 
is  willing  to  admit  that  the  other  has  a  useful  function  to 
perform  in  the  progress  of  society.  Each  regards  the  other 
with  deep  feeling  as  the  enemy  of  everything  that  is  funda 
mentally  good  in  government  and  society. 

In  seeking  a  workable  definition  of  these  terms,  the  philo 
sophic  insight  of  Thomas  Jefferson  is  a  beacon  light  to  the 

103 


104  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

inquirer.  When  Jefferson  withdrew  from  active  political 
life  at  the  close  of  his  presidency  in  1809,  he  left  behind  him 
the  heat  and  smoke  of  partisan  strife  and  retired  to  a  con 
templative  life  on  his  Virginia  estate,  where  his  fellow- 
countrymen  learned  to  revere  him  as  the  "Sage  of  Monti- 
cello."  The  voluminous  correspondence  of  these  twilight 
years  of  his  life  is  full  of  instruction  for  the  student  of 
history  and  politics.  His  tremendous  curiosity  caused  him 
to  find  an  unfailing  source  of  speculation  in  the  proclivity 
of  mankind  to  separate  into  contrasting  schools  of  opinion. 
In  one  luminous  passage,  representative  of  the  bent  of  his 
thought,  he  declared :  "Men,  according  to  their  constitutions, 
/,\and  the  circumstances  in  which  they  are  placed,  differ  hon 
estly  in  opinion.  Some  are  Whigs,  Liberals,  Democrats,  call 
them  what  you  please.  Others  are  Tories,  Serviles,  Aris 
tocrats,  etc.  The  latter  fear  the  people,  and  wish  to  transfer 
all  power  to  the  higher  classes  of  society ;  the  former  consider 
the  people  as  the  safest  depository  of  power  in  the  last  resort ; 
they  cherish  them,  therefore,  and  wish  to  leave  in  them  all 
the  powers  to  the  exercise  of  which  they  are  competent." 

In  this  passage  Jefferson  does  not  use  the  expressions 
"conservative"  and  "radical" — indeed,  those  words  had  no 
place  in  the  American  political  vocabulary  until  Civil  War 
times — but  his  penetrating  analysis  throws  a  flood  of  light  on 
pthe  significance  of  those  terms  nevertheless.     The  Tory  who 
fears  the  people  and  the  Whig  who  trusts  them  are  equiva- 
'  lent  to  our  own  categories  of  "conservative"  and  "radical." 
1   Thus  Jefferson  finds  the  vital  distinction  between  the  two 
I    schools  of  opinion  in  their  respective  attitudes  toward  popu 
lar  government. 

But  before  accepting  Jefferson's  classification  as  correct, 
what  shall  we  do  with  the  common  notion  that  the  conserva 
tive  is  a  person  who  opposes  change  and  that  the  ear-mark  of 
the  radical  is  his  liking  for  innovation  ?  This  does  not  ^se 


RADICALISM  AND  CONSERVATISM         105 

to  be  a  fundamental  distinction.  If  a  difference  of  opinion 
concerning  the  need  of  change  were  the  basic  difference 
between  the  two,  then  Americans  who  advocate  a  limitation 
of  the  suffrage  to  male  property-owners  may  properly  be 
regarded  as  radicals,  for  they  advocate  an  alteration  in  the 
established  order ;  and  French  patriots  of  today  opposing  the 
re-establishment  of  the  Orleanist  monarchy  are  to  be  classed 
as  conservatives,  for  they  would  keep  things  unchanged. 
Few  people  would  be  willing  to  follow  the  logic  of  their 
premises  to  such  conclusions.  On  the  other  hand,  it  cannot 
be  denied  that  history  has  generally  shown  the  radical  in  the 
role  of  an  active  proponent  of  change  and  has  cast  the  con 
servative  for  the  part  of  the  stalwart  defender  of  things  as 
they  are.  Is  such  evidence  to  be  dismissed  as  a  coincidence 
oft-repeated,  or  has  there  been  behind  the  actions  of  both 
radical  and  conservative  some  self-interested  purpose  which 
has  determined  their  respective  attitudes  toward  the  estab 
lished  order  ? 

The  very  question  perhaps  suggests  the  answer.  Broadly 
speaking,  all  history  has  been  an  intermittent  contest  on  the 
part  of  the  more  numerous  section  of  society  to  wrest  power 
and  privilege  from  the  minority  which  had  hitherto  possessed 
it.  The  group  which  at  any  period  favored  broader  popular 
rights  and  liberties  was  therefore  likely  to  find  itself  as  a  con 
tender  for  the  new  and  untried,  leaving  to  its  antagonists  the 
comfortable  repute  of  being  the  conservators  of  the  status 
quo  and  the  foes  of  change.  But,  though  the  historical 
conditions  influenced  the  character  of  the  contest,  such 
conditions  were,  after  all,  merely  the  stage  setting  of  the 
struggle.  Advocacy  of  change  should,  under  such  circum 
stances,  be  regarded  merely  as  the  means  employed  to  attain 
an  end  and,  in  no  sense,  as  an  end  in  itself.  Recurring  now 
to  Jefferson's  definition,  the  goal  sought  by  each  group — 
whether  it  be  in  the  direction  of  greater  or  less  democracy — 


io6  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

would  appear  to  constitute  the  real  difference  between  the 
two. 

It  should  be  clear,  then,  that  the  radical  is  a  person  who,  in 
contrast  to  the  conservative,  favors  a  larger  participation  of 
the  people  in  the  control  of  government  and  society  and  in 
the  benefits  accruing  from  such  control.  To  attain  his  ideal 
^  the  radical  may  become  a  protagonist  of  change ;  he  usually 
has  been  one,  as  a  matter  of  history,  but  this  fact  is  a  mere 
incident  to,  and  not  the  touchstone  of,  his  radicalism.  The 
temperament  of  the  radical  is  sanguine.  He  can  say  with 
Jefferson :  "I  steer  my  bark  with  Hope  in  the  head,  leaving 
Fear  astern.  My  hopes,  indeed,  sometimes  fail;  but  not 
oftener  than  the  forebodings  of  the  gloomy."  The  conserva 
tive,  on  the  other  hand,  is  skeptical  of  the  capacity  of  the 
mass  of  the  people  to  protect  their  own  interests  intelli 
gently;  and  believing  that  social  progress  in  the  past  has 
always  come  from  the  leadership  of  wealth  and  ability,  he  is 
the  consistent  opponent  of  the  unsettling  plans,  of  the  radical. 
If  the  old  saw  is  true  that  a  pessimist  is  the  wife  of  an  opti 
mist,  perhaps  the  cynicism  of  the  conservative  is  amply 
accounted  for  by  his  enforced  association  with  the  radical. 
The  radical  regards  himself  as  a  man  of  vision;  but  the 
conservative  sees  him  only  as  a  visionary.  The  radical  as  a 
type  is  likely  to  be  broad-minded  and  shallow-minded;  £he 
disinterested  conservative  is  inclined  to  be  high-minded  and 
narrow-minded. 

Of  course,  the  expressions  "radical"  and  "conservative" 
are  relative  terms,  for  at  any  given  time  the  lines  are  drawn 
by  the  opposing  forces  upon  the  basis  of  the  circumstances 
then  existing.  It  is  a  truism  that  the  radical  of  today  may 
become  the  conservative  of  tomorrow.  This  does  not  neces 
sarily  argue  inconsistency.  It  may  indicate  rather  that,  when 
the  specific  measures  which  the  radical  has  advocated  have 
been  adopted,  he  believes  that  the  supreme  aim  of  public 
policy  has  been  attained  and  he  becomes  a  defender  of  the 


RADICALISM  AND  CONSERVATISM        107 

new  status  quo  against  any  further  extensions  of  popular 
rights.  This  is  perhaps  the  same  as  saying  that  the  con 
servative  of  today,  had  he  held  the  same  opinions  on  political 
and  social  questions  a  generation  ago,  would  have  been  looked 
upon  then  as  a  radical.  The  movement  of  history  has  been 
from  radicalism  to  conservatism  so— far  as  the.  attitude.J)f 
individuals  is  concerned,  but  ftpjn  conservatism  to  radical- 
ism  so  far  as  the  trend  of  public  policy  is  concerned. 

Not  only  are  the  terms  relative  in  the  sense  just  indicated, 
but  they  are  comparative  as  applied  to  variations  of  opinion 
that  exist  within  each  school  of  thought.  In  the  conserva 
tive  camp  are  to  be  found  different  degrees  of  distrust  of 
popular  rule,  varying  from  the  purblind  reactionaries  on  the 
extreme  right  to  the  moderates  on  the  extreme  left.  Simi 
larly  the  radical  camp  has  its  subdivisions,  comprising  all 
grades  of  confidence  in  popular  government  from  a  left  wing 
of  ultra-radicals  to  a  wing  at  the  opposite  extreme  composed 
of  progressives  or  liberals.  The  apostles  of  lawlessness — 
those  who  would  accomplish  their  ends  through  a  defiance  of, 
or  assault  on,  the  law — are  to  be  found  in  the  exterior  wings 
of  both  camps.  In  this  sense  the  reactionaries  who  seek  to 
gain  their  purposes  through  the  corruption  or  intimidation  of 
the  courts  are  to  be  regarded  as  much  the  enemies  of  law 
and  order  as  the  followers  of  Daniel  Shays  in  1786  when 
they  tried  to  disperse  the  courts  with  violence.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  moderates  of  the  conservative  camp  tend  to  frater 
nize  with  the  liberals  of  the  radical  camp  without,  however, 
completely  merging  their  identity  because  of  deep-grained 
prepossessions  and  habits  of  thought.  It  is  in  this  middle 
zone  or  "No  Man's  Land"  between  the  camps  that  there 
occurs  the  only  true  meeting  of  minds;  and  in  democratic 
countries,  advances  can  be  made,  under  legal  forms  and 
proper  safeguards,  only  through  the  temporary  union  of 
these  groups  for  common  purposes. 

No  attempt  need  be  made  here  to  idealize  or  glorify  either 


io8  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

the  radical  or  the  conservative.  Adherents  of  each  are  con 
stantly  engaged  in  constructing  traditions  which  would 
ascribe  superhuman  attributes  to  the  great  leaders  and 
spokesmen  of  their  respective  schools  of  opinion  in  the  past. 
In  this  myth-making  process  the  radicals  inevitably  suffer  a 
serious  handicap,  for  the  audacious  reformer  of  a  century 
ago  is  likely  to  appear  today  as  a  man  of  orthodox  ideas^and 
latter-day  conservatives,  without  any  appreciation  of  the 
earlier  clash  of  ideas,  are  likely  to  claim  him  as  their  very 
jDwn.  For  example,  the  average  American  citizen  who  values 
property  rights  as  superior  to  human  rights  easily  imagines 
himself  in  the  forefront  of  the  riot  that  led  to  the  Boston 
Massacre,  for  through  the  mellow  haze  of  time  he  forgets 
the  real  character  of  that  street  brawl  with  its  raucous  mob 
of  blatant,  missile-hurling  roughs  and  half  breeds.1 

Whatever  may  be  said  in  praise  of  either  the  conservative 
or  the  radical,  both  find  themselves  in  bad  company,  for  each 
makes  his  appeal  to  some  of  the  basest  as  well  as  to  some  of 
the  most  ennobling  qualities  of  human  nature.  The  thinking 
conservative  finds  his  chief  allies  in  the  self -complacency  of 
comfortable  mediocrity,  in  the  apathy  and  stupidity  of  the 
toil-worn  multitudes,  and  in  the  aggressive  self-interest  of 
the  privileged  classes.  All  those  who  dread  uncertainty 
either  because  of  timidity  or  from  conventional-mindedness 
or  for  fear  of  material  loss  are  enlisted  under  the  conserva 
tive  standard.  The  honest  radical  draws  much  of  his  sup 
port  from  self-seeking  demagogues  and  reckless  experiment 
ers,  from  people  who  want  the  world  changed  because  they 
cannot  get  along  in  it  as  it  is,  from  poseurs  and  dilettanti, 
and  from  malcontents  who  love  disturbance  for  its  own  sake. 
The  two  schools  have  more  in  common  than  either  would 
admit;  both  have  their  doctrinaires  and  dogmatists;  both 

1  The  reader,  of  a  conservative  turn  of  mind,  should  not  fail  to  read  A.  P. 
Peabody's  article,  "Boston  Mobs  before  the  Revolution"  in  the  Atlantic  Monthly, 
vol.  Ixii,  pp.  321-333. 


RADICALISM  AND  CONSERVATISM        109 

tend  toward  a  stiffening  of  intellectual  creeds ;  and  who  can 
deny  that  each  has  its  share  of  mental  defectives  and  the 
criminal-minded  ? 

II 

There  are  special  reasons  why  radical  thought  and  aspira 
tion  should  have  attained  fertile  growth  in  American  soil. 
From  our  earliest  history  a  process  of  social  selection  has 
been  going  on  which  has  served  to  separate  the  radical  from 
the  conservative  elements  of  the  population  and  has  given  to 
the  former  unique  opportunities  for  impressing  their  philos 
ophy  upon  the  population  in  general.  As  Professor  Van 
Tyne  has  pointed  out  in  a  notable  passage,  the  tendency  of 
colonization  was  to  stock  the  American  colonies  with  radicals 
and . dissenters  and  to  leave  behind  in  England  the  conserva 
tives  and  conformists,  thereby  rendering  inevitable  sharp 
contrasts  in  temperament  and  outlook  between  the  colonists 
and  the  mother  country.  This  process  has  repeated  itself 
with  endless  variation  in  the  later  history  of  our  country. 
The  incoming  tides  of  ^foreign  immigration  have  deposited 
upon  our  shores  many  of  the  restless,  and  rebellious  spirits 
of  the  Old  World  civilizations.  The  periodic  flow  of  west 
ward  settlement  in  this  country  has  tended  to  carry  the 
adventurous  and  the  discontented  forward  into  new  lands  of 
opportunity,  leaving  the  older  settlements  to  the  control  of 
timid  and  conservative  people.  Thus  the  radical  spirit  has 
constantly  been  fed  and  refreshed  by  contributions  from 
abroad ;  and  in  our  own  land  the  processes  of  social  integra 
tion  have  tended  to  segregate  the  radical-minded  geograph 
ically  and  to  permit  them  to  develop  without  the  restraining 
influences  of  a  long-established  conservative  class. 

Under  such  favoring  circumstances  radicalism  might  have 
been  expected  to  attain  its  most  extreme  expression  in 
America.  The  result,  however,  has  been  neither  a  reign  of 


I  io  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

overbearing  individualism  nor  the  establishment  of  a  co 
operative  commonwealth,  although  both  forms  of  social 
organization  had  their  advocates  and  were  given  sporadic 
trial.  The  acquisition  of  property  on  easy  terms  in  the 
newer  parts  of  the  country  made  the  settlers  quickly  forget 
the  bitter  injustices  and  oppressions  of  the  older  civilizations 
and,  without  sapping  their  interest  in  democratic  progress, 
gave  them  a  personal  stake  in  the  orderly  advance  of  the 
community.  Indeed,  the  very  freedom  which  they  enjoyed 
to  experiment  as  they  wished  with  their  own  lives  and  prop 
erty  exercised  a  moderating  influence  on  their  conduct.  So 
it  has  happened  that,  while  progress  along  liberal  lines  has 
been  rapid  in  the  newer  parts  of  America,  it  has  been  accom 
plished  through  the  acts  of  legislatures  and  the  amending  of 
constitutions.  In  the  older  sections  such  advances  have  been 
made  slowly  and  have  often  been  attended  by  severe  political 
struggles,  sometimes  culminating  in  armed  conflict,  as  in  the 
case  of  the  Dorr  Rebellion  in  Rhode  Island  in  1842-1843. 

It  is  not  surprising  that,  as  a  result  of  this  continuing 
process  of  social  differentiation,  one  of  the  outstanding  char 
acteristics  of  American  national  development  should  be  the 
constant  interest  of  the  people  in  movements  for  democratic 
and  humanitarian  reform.  Every  movement  of  radical  ten 
dency  has  developed  through  certain  clearly-defined  stages, 
as  if  in  obedience  to  some  immutable  law  of  social  dynamics. 
These  phases  can  generally  be  reduced  to  three.  At  the  out 
set  there  occurs  a  period  of  violent  propaganda  conducted  by 
a  small  group  of  agitators.  These  pioneers  resort  to  pic 
turesque  and  sensational  methods  of  propaganda  in  order  to 
awaken  the  apathetic  public  to  the  presence  of  evil  condi 
tions  and  the  need  for  change.  They  constitute  a  flying 
wedge  of  protest  and  moral  indignation.  The  late  ex- 
President  Roosevelt  referred  to  this  vanguard  when  he  de 
clared  in  his  autobiography:  "Every  reform  movement  has 


RADICALISM  AND  CONSERVATISM         in 

a  lunatic  fringe."  It  is  indeed  a  "lunatic  fringe,"  in  the 
sense  that  these  trumpeters  of  reform  act  irrationally  accord 
ing  to  the  standards  of  the  majority  of  the  people,  and  must 
expect  to  suffer  their  ridicule  or  ostracism  or  persecution. 
In  this  advanced  group  may  ordinarily  be  found  the  "soap 
boxer,"  the  "muckraker,"  the  idealist,  the  doctrinaire,  the 
fanatic,  the  would-be  revolutionist  and,  at  times  even  in 
American  history,  the  martyr.  These  agitators,  irrespective 
of  individual  peculiarities,  share  a  bitter  disregard  of  exist 
ing  public  opinion,  a  passion  for  destructive  criticism,  and  an 
emotional  conviction  that  in  their  proposal  is  to  be  found  a 
panacea  for  human  ills. 

Some  movements  never  advance  beyond  this  first  ultra- 
_radical  stage,  for  they  fail  to  gain  converts  outside  of  the 
group  immediately  engaged  in  furthering  the  cause.  The 
second  stage  arrives  when  the  pioneer  reformers  succeed  in 
arousing  interest  and  approval  among  the  soberer  elements 
of  the  population.  The  ideas  long  regarded  as  "queer"  or 
"dangerous"  are  now  on  the  point  of  gaining  the  sanction  of 
respectability;  and  the  assurance  of  a  growing  popular  favor 
enlists  the  support  of  some  of  the  experienced  leaders  of  the 
people — the  "practical  statesmen."  These  men  possess  the 
constructive  ability,  the  organizing  genius  and  the  knowledge 
of  political  strategy  which  are  necessary  in  order  to  carry 
into  execution  the  ideas  of  the  agitators.  Less  agile  of 
imagination  and  frequently  less  pure  of  purpose,  they  know 
better  the  temper  and  limitations  of  the  average  man;  and 
under  their  direction  the  new  policies  and  doctrines,  perhaps 
in  modified  form,  become  the  law  of  the  land.  Thus  the 
actual  achievers  of  the  reform  are  the  liberals  or  progres 
sives,  aided  perhaps  by  those  moderates  of  the  conservative 
camp  who  favor  the  proposed  change  as  the  best  preventive 
of  more  basic  changes.  If,  as  sometimes  happens,  some  of 
the  abler  leaders  of  the  first  period  survive  into  the  second 


ii2  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

and  are  placed  in  positions  of  power  by  a  surge  of  popular 
feeling,  they  usually  become  sobered  and  moderated  by 
responsibility  and  experience,  and  their  conduct  is  scarcely 
distinguishable  from  that  of  the  practical  statesmen. 

The  third  and  final  stage  of  the  reform  is  reached  when 
the  new  doctrines,  having  lost  their  air  of  strangeness  and 
demonstrated  either  their  utility  or  harmlessness,  become 
imbedded  in  the  conscience  and  philosophy  of  the  people  at 
large.  The  public  becomes  adjusted  to  practices  and  policies 
that  were  altogether  unacceptable  a  few  years  earlier ;  indeed 
most  of  the  people  have  already  forgotten  that  these  reforms 
were  not  always  a  part  of  the  commonly  accepted  stock  of 
ideas.  The  cycle  of  reform  has  about  completed  itself ;  for 
public  opinion  hardens  into  a  new  conservatism  and  forms  a 
crust  that  toughly  resists  any  further  efforts  for  change. 
Advocates  for  new  advances  must  employ  the  militant  and 
fantastic  methods  which  mark  the  "lunatic  fringe"  of  a  new 
crusade  for  reform. 

in 

Examples  of  reform  movements  abound  in  American  his 
tory.  These  have  been  multifarious  in  their  objects  and 
reflect  the  diversified  interests  and  social  outlook  of  the  ages 
in  which  they  flourished.  Some  of  the  most  significant  of 
these  enterprises  have  been  concerned  with  improving  the  lot 
of  the  average  man  or  the  condition  of  society's  wards — the 
dependent  and  the  criminal.  From  many  points  of  view 
such  movements  would  appear  to  merit  more  careful  study 
by  the  youth  in  our  schools  than  most  reforms  of  a  purely 
political  type;  but,  the  anti-slavery  movement  excepted,  re 
formative  movements  of  a  humanitarian  character  receive 
little  or  no  attention  in  the  orthodox  histories.  Yet  what 
thoughtful  American  can  deny  the  superb  courage  and  in 
estimable  service  of  the  men  and  women  (unknown  to  most 
pf  us)  whose  efforts  made  possible  religious  liberty,  free 


RADICALISM  AND  CONSERVATISM         113 

public  education,  scientific  care  of  the  deaf,  the  dumb  and 
the  blind,  a  more  humane  criminal  code,  the  abolition  of  child 
labor,  reformative  treatment  of  criminals,  statutory  reduc 
tion  of  the  workday,  governmental  protection  of  the  public 
health,  and  the  abolition  of  the  saloon? 

The  reforming  activities  of  political  parties  and  party 
factions  are  better  known.  Jefferson  advanced  the  proposi 
tion  that  a  people  should  never  pass  legislation  binding  for  a 
period  longer  than  the  lifetime  of  their  own  generation,  for, 
as  conditions  change,  men  change,  and  every  fresh  genera 
tion  should  have  a  free  opportunity  to  fashion  its  own  laws 
and  constitutions  according  to  its  special  circumstances. 
Using  certain  tables  compiled  by  M.  de  Buffon,  he  went  so 
far  as  to  fix  the  average  duration  of  a  generation  at  nineteen 
years.  Looking  back  over  the  annals  of  the  United  States, 
we  can  see  that  the  course  of  our  national  development  has, 
in  a  large  degree,  mirrored  the  changing  needs  and  interests 
of  the  procession  of  generations.  From  one  point  of  view, 
American  history  may  be  regarded  as  a  succession  of  eager 
new  generations  ruthlessly  elbowing  aside  older  and  effete 
generations ;  and  although  lacking  the  automatic  modes  of 
expression  that  Jefferson  would  have  provided,  each  fresh 
accession  of  leadership  has  wrought  a  transformation  of 
party  creeds,  and  represented  new  policies,  practices  and 
ethical  conceptions,  better  adapted  to  the  changed  economic 
and  social  conditions  of  the  time.  It  is  scarcely  necessary 
to  set  forth  the  history  of  each  of  these  generations  in  detail, 
for  the  results  of  their  labors  are  recorded  in  the  achieve- 
jnents  of  the  nation.  Each  fresh  generation  experienced  the 
usual  difficulties  of  a  group  advocating  unaccustomed  ideas ; 
and  the  following  sketch  should  yield,  among  other  things, 
many  illustrations  of  the  familiar  cycle  by  which  novel  ideas 
become  acceptable  maxims  of  policy  and  then  are  conse 
crated  as  the  truisms  of  statesmen. 

Without  going  back  into  the  period  of  our  colonial  begin- 


ii4  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

nings,  it  is  plain  to  see  that  the  Declaration  of  Independence 
signalized  the  accession  of  the  first  generation  to  power  in 
our  national  history.  No  spirit  of  decrepit  age  or  feeble 
counsel  stalked  through  the  scintillant  passages  of  that  im 
mortal  document.  Strong  medicine  though  it  was  for  the 
American  subjects  of  George  III,  their  minds  had  been 
prepared  for  the  event  by  a  long  period  of  violent  propa 
ganda  conducted  by  such  skilled  masters  of  the  art  as  James 
Otis,  Patrick  Henry,  Samuel  Adams,  Alexander  McDougall, 
Charles  Thomson,  Christopher  Gadsden  and  Tom  Paine. 
The  methods  of  these  patriot-agitators  were  thoroughly 

r  demagogic  and  sensational,  characterized  by  unlawful  assem 
blages  and  mob  violence  as  well  as  by  legislative  memorials 
and  pamphleteering  of  unusual  merit;  and  gradually  they 
succeeded  in  arousing  the  colonial  population  to  a  realization 
of  the  injustices  which  they  decried.  They  sought  radical 
reform,  for  it  was  their  object  to  destroy  the  autocratic 
power  of  the  British  king  and  to  establish  in  America  an 
untried  form  of  government  based  upon  the  principle  of 
popular  rule. 

Due  to  the  unusual  conditions  existing  in  a  country  torn 
by  revolutionary  conflict,  the  influence  of  the  original  agi 
tators  continued  beyond  the  time  when  their  chief  usefulness 
had  expired.  Independence  proclaimed,  the  task  fell  to 
them  of  establishing  a  federal  government  for  the  thirteen 
new-fledged  states,  a  task  demanding  constructive  genius  of 
a  high  order.  Their  effort  at  a  solution,  offered  in  the  form 
of  the  Articles  of  Confederation,  precipitated  the  "Critical 
Period"  of  American  history  and  revealed  the  poverty  of 
their  organizing  ability.  Under  the  circumstances  they  were 
compelled  to  surrender  leadership  not  to  a  new  generation 
but  to  a  different  element  of  their  own  generation — to  men 
who  thought  less  in  terms  of  theories  and  emotions,  and 
more  in  terms  of  realities,  men  who  did  not  despise  bargain 


RADICALISM  AND  CONSERVATISM        115 

and  compromise  if  they  might  thereby  gain  the  end  they 
had  in  view.  The  accession  of  these  men  inaugurated  a 
period  of  conservative  reaction.  Hamilton,  John  Adams, 
Washington,  John  Jay  and  their  Federalist  associates  ac 
cepted  the  liberal  philosophy  of  their  predecessors  with 
mental  reservations ;  but  they  brought  about  the  adoption  of 
the  Constitution  and  created  under  it  a  national  government 
which  not  only  worked  successfully  at  the  time  but  which 
stands  today  as  one  of  the  oldest  continuous  constitutional 
governments  in  the  world. 

When  the  Federalists  were  yet  at  the  height  of  their 
power,  the  sappers  and  miners  of  a  new  age  were  passion 
ately  devoting  their  energies  to  the  subversion  of  the  existing 
regime.  Led  by  such  men  as  Jefferson,  Madison,  Aaron 
Burr,  William  Duane,  Thomas  Callender  and  Philip  Freneau, 
the  object  of  these  crusaders  was  radical  reform.  They 
wished  to  replace  what  they  considered  to  be  a  centralized 
government  of  pseudo-monarchical  tendencies  with  a  truly 
republican  government  based  upon  the  principle  of  decen 
tralization  of  authority.  The  presidential  election  of  1800 
brought  the  new  leaders  into  control,  and  Jefferson's  inaugu 
ration  may  be  regarded  as  the  beginning  of  the  second  gen 
eration  of  American  statesmanship.  The  new  rulers  con 
sisted  in  part  of  the  abler  figures  among  the  group  of  agi 
tators;  and  the  leaders  of  the  supplanted  generation  formed 
the  dwindling  nucleus  of  an  intransigeant  opposition.  Jeffer 
son  and  his  successors  in  the  presidency,  Madison  and 
Monroe,  were  sobered  by  the  responsibility  of  holding  office 
and  found  themselves  forced  to  modify  in  practice  many 
views  that  had  seemed  unassailable  in  speculation.  Not 
withstanding  a  flabbiness  of  administration  characteristic  of 
a  liberal  government  in  power,  the  Jeffersonian  Republicans 
succeeded  in  proving  the  practicability  of  liberal  principles  as 
the  guide  of  public  policy. 


n6  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

While  the  JefFersonian  Republicans  were  still  holding  the 
seats  of  authority,  a  growing  discontent  against  their  control 
began  to  find  expression  under  the  skillful  direction  of  a 
younger  generation  of  leaders  aspiring  for  power.  The 
pacifistic  foreign  policy  of  the  elder  statesmen  in  face  of  the 
aggressions  of  England  and  France  furnished  the  issue  upon 
which  the  new  group  succeeded  in  attaining  national  promi 
nence.  Henry  Clay,  John  C.  Calhoun,  Richard  M.  Johnson, 
Felix  Grundy,  Langdon  Cheves,  Peter  B.  Porter  and  other 
"War  Hawks"  entered  Congress  in  1811  and  plunged  the 
nation  into  an  unprofitable  war  contrary  to  the  best  judg 
ment  of  many  of  the  seasoned  statesmen  of  the  time.  By 
the  close  of  the  war,  the  new  generation  had  formulated 
their  plan  of  legislative  reform  and  were  definitely  in  com 
mand  of  the  situation,  although  their  measures  were  looked 
on  askance  by  Madison  and  Monroe  and  bitterly  opposed  by 
Daniel  Webster,  a  young  man  of  the  new  age  still  lingering 
under  the  influence  of  the  discredited  Federalist  leadership. 
Their  program  of  legislation,  presented  to  Congress  in  1816- 
1817,  was  essentially  conservative  in  its  tendency,  containing 
as  its  main  features  a  protective  tariff,  a  new  and  greater 
United  States  Bank,  the  construction  of  internal  improve 
ments  at  national  expense,  and  adequate  military  prepared 
ness.  Before  they  yielded  to  the  onrush  of  the  next  genera 
tion  most  of  these  reforms  had  been  passed  into  federal 
statutes;  indeed,  their  chief  policies  gained  such  general 
acceptance  that  party  lines  disappeared  entirely  about  1820. 

Shortly  thereafter  began  the  inevitable  agitation  which 
presaged  the  accession  of  a  new  generation  to  the  control  of 
public  policy.  The  forerunners  of  the  new  leadership  raised 
their  voices  in  protest  against  the  political  philosophy  that 
controlled  the  times — the  right  of  the  well-born  to  rule — 
rather  than  against  any  specific  measures  which  the  dominant 
group  had  enacted.  The  first  attempt  at  revolt  resulted  in 


RADICALISM  AND  CONSERVATISM        117 

the  indecisive  election  of  1824;  but  thereafter  a  veritable  hue 
and  cry  was  raised  against  the  Adams-Clay  administration 
and  all  their  works  and  doctrines,  and  the  forces  of  discon 
tent  became  well  organized  under  the  direction  of  such  men 
as  William  B.  Lewis,  Thomas  H.  Benton,  Amos  Kendall, 
Duff  Green  and  Martin  Van  Buren.  The  inauguration  of 
Andrew  Jackson  in  1829  marked  the  entrance  of  the  new 
political  generation,  the  fourth  in  order  of  succession,  into 
command  of  the  government.  The  practical  statesmen  ,of 
the  new  order  were  Jackson  himself,  Thomas  H.  Benton  and 
Martin  Van  Buren,  each  of  whom,  in  his  own  way,  embodied 
the  liberal  ideals  of  the  new  time.  Their  principles  called  for 
increased  control  of  the  common  people  in  all  departments  of 
government  and  politics ;  or,  in  other  words,  for  the  abolition 
of  special  privilege  in  appointments  to  office,  in  the  federal 
banking  system  (the  United  States  Bank),  in  internal  im 
provements,  and  in  the  disposition  of  western  lands.  Before 
they  were  retired  from  power,  the  Jacksonian  Democrats 
succeeded  in  translating  their  doctrines  into  governmental 
practice  though  challenged  at  every  turn  by  the  brilliant  and 
versatile  opposition  of  the  leaders  whom  they  had  supplanted. 
Many  of  the  details  of  their  program  were  modified  by  later 
generations,  but  the  basic  principles  of  government  which 
they  established  are  to  this  day  accepted  as  the  foundations 
of  the  American  democratic  structure. 

While  the  generation  of  Jackson  was  still  strongly  en 
trenched  in  power,  the  portents  that  foretold  the  oncoming 
of  a  new  statesmanship  were  beginning  to  display  themselves 
in  the  political  heavens.  The  heralds  of  the  coming  era  were 
deeply  convinced  that  the  pivotal  issue  in  national  affairs 
was  one  which  the  elder  leaders  had  carefully  ignored  and 
evaded — the  slavery  question.  To  a  consideration  of  this 
issue  the  new  generation  brought  all  the  energy  and  arrogant 
assurance  with  which  fresh  generations  have  always  ap- 


Ii8  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

preached  weighty  problems  of  public  policy.  Unfortunately 
for  the  orderly  evolution  of  national  institutions,  the  new 
leadership  brought  conflicting  viewpoints  to  bear  upon  the 
great  problem  of  the  time,  one  portion  of  the  new  statesmen 
hailing  from  the  South  and  the  other  portion  from  the  free 
states  of  the  North.  The  great  conflict  of  the  new  era  was 
not,  as  so  often  before,  a  contest  between  a  superannuated 
statesmanship  and  the  buoyant,  resistless  vanguard  of  a  new 
leadership,  but  a  struggle  between  men  of  the  same  genera 
tion,  equally  sure  of  themselves,  equally  determined  to  attain 
dominance  and  establish  their  policies  in  governmental 
practice. 

With  the  accession  of  John  Tyler  to  the  presidency  in 
iS^ixthe  new  generation  assumed  direction  of  the  govern 
ment  with  the  conservative  pro-slavery  contingent  in  the 
ascendant,  a  position  which  they  succeeded  in  retaining  for 
nearly  twenty  years.  From  the  outset  they  had  to  contend 
with  the  ceaseless  and  growing  agitation  of  the  abolitionists, 
led  by  such  men  as  Garrison,  Giddings,  Wendell  Phillips, 
Gerrit  Smith  and  John  Greenleaf  Whittier;  and  all  their 
guile  and  power  availed  them  nothing  against  zealots  who 
were  inspired  only  to  greater  effort  by  "gag  resolutions"  and 
mob  attacks.  Nevertheless  the  mass  of  the  people  were 
slow  to  accept  the  teachings  of  the  abolitionists;  and  in  the 
meantime  the  conservative  ideas  of  the  pro-slavery  group 
were  in  large  part  carried  into  force.  Under  the  skillful 
guidance  of  men  like  James  K.  Polk,  Jefferson  Davis, 
Stephen  A.  Douglas  and  Alexander  H.  Stephens,  half  of  the 
Republic  of  Mexico  was  annexed,  the  federal  territories 
were  opened  to  slavery,  and  a  stricter  fugitive  slave  law  was 
enacted. 

But  gradually  the  anti-slavery  agitation  began  to  bear 
fruit.  Leadership  in  the  movement,  originally  held  by  ultra- 
radical  abolitionists  like  Garrison  and  Phillips,  passed  to 


RADICALISM  AND  CONSERVATISM        119 

anti-slavery  liberals  like  Chase  and  Seward  and  Lincoln. 
The  propaganda  of  emotionalism  was  succeeded  by  appeals 
to  reason  and  organized  political  activity  culminating  in  the 
Republican  party.  Division  within  the  ranks  of  the  Demo 
cratic  leaders  early  in  1860  gave  the  anti-slavery  forces  their 
opportunity;  and  in  the  presidential  election  of  that  year 
they  elected  their  candidate  Abraham  Lincoln  to  the  presi 
dency  on  a  platform  pledging  the  party  to  the  non-extension 
of  slavery.  The  southerners  believed  that  behind  this  mod 
erate  program  lay  the  uncompromising  purposes  of  men  like 
Garrison  and  John  Brown ;  and  they  chose  to  shift  any  sub 
sequent  controversy  from  legislative  halls  to  the  battlefield. 
The  processes  of  orderly  social  growth  are  always  un 
settled  by  military  conflict ;  and  in  the  case  of  the  Civil  War 
the  high  passions  aroused  by  the  struggle  made  it  possible 
for  the  anti-slavery  radicals  to  gain  ascendency  in  Congress 
although  under  other  circumstances  their  period  of  influence 
would  have  expired  when  the  anti-slavery  cause  was  taken 
up  by  the  practical  statesmen.  Such  men  as  Thaddeus 
Stevens,  Charles  Sumner  and  Ben  Wade  gloried  in  the  name 
Radical  as  distinguished  from  Conservative  or  Administra 
tion  Republican ;  and  under  their  propulsion,  abolition  meas 
ures  of  increasing  severity  were  enacted  by  Congress,  and 
the  president  was  given  no  peace  until  he  had  issued  the 
Emancipation  Proclamation.  When  victory  crowned  the 
Union  arms,  the  task  fell  to  the  Radicals,  unsuited  to  their 
genius,  of  reconstructing  the  South ;  and  this  they  undertook 
with  the  same  energy  and  singleness  of  purpose  with  which 
they  had  fought  the  war.  Applying  their  doctrinaire  pre 
conceptions  to  the  solution  of  the  negro  problem,  they  raised 
the  slaves  to  the  level  of  white  citizens  and  conferred  upon 
the  black  men  the  right  to  vote.  But  by  these  last  measures 
the  generation  had  over-reached  itself  in  its  radicalism;  re 
forms  enacted  under  such  auspices  and  at  such  a  juncture 


120  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

were  not  likely  to  be  enduring  in  effect.  Although  the 
changes  were  solemnly  embodied  in  the  federal  Constitution 
in  the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth  amendments,  they  were  so  far 
in  advance  of  public  opinion  that  to  this  day  they  remain  a 
dead  letter  so  far  as  the  great  majority  of  the  negroes  are 
concerned. 

The  reconstruction  statesmen  began  rapidly  to  pass  away 
early  in  the  seventies  as  if  burnt  out  by  the  very  intensity  of 
their  zeal,  and  their  places  were  soon  taken  by  new  men 
whose  minds  dwelt  on  matters  far  removed  from  the  ideal 
istic  and  humanitarian  interests  of  the  earlier  period.  The 
new  leaders  were  concerned  primarily  with  the  economic  and 
industrial  exploitation  of  the  nation's  resources  and  with 
governmental  policies  that  would  assist  material  development 
at  every  turn.  Under  their  direction  the  energies  of  the 
government  were,  in  the  sixth  generation  of  American  poli 
tics,  turned  to  conservative  purposes — to  land-grants  for 
railroads,  the  protective  tariff  system,  "sound  money"  finance 
and  a  policy  of  non-interference  in  the  methods  and  manage 
ment  of  industry.  Men  like  Roscoe  Conkling,  Elaine,  Gar- 
field,  Levi  P.  Morton,  Samuel  J.  Randall  and  "Czar"  Reed 
came  into  charge  of  public  affairs.  Even  such  spokesmen  as 
Schurz,  Curtis  and  Cleveland,  whose  voices  were  raised  in 
protest  against  some  of  the  more  obnoxious  practices  of  the 
dominant  leadership,  did  not  differ  fundamentally  from  them 
in  their  conception  of  the  functions  of  government.  While 
this  generation  was  in  power,  the  United  States  made  the 
transition  to  the  modern  era  and  the  foundations  were  laid 
for  the  stupendous  business  development  of  the  present  time. 

The  note  of  dissent  was  early  sounded  against  the  domi 
nation  of  the  government  by  the  great  corporate  interests; 
but  the  protestants  were  for  many  years  in  a  hopeless  minor 
ity.  They  spent  their  energies,  with  little  effect,  in  launch 
ing  radical  minor  parties  and  in  organizing  radical  agrarian 


RADICALISM  AND  CONSERVATISM         121 

and  workingman  associations.  In  the  decade  of  the  nineties 
the  movement  of  protest  against  the  existing  order  reached 
threatening  proportions  in  the  Populist  movement  and  the 
"free  silver"  campaign  of  1896.  In  the  opening  years  of 
the  new  century  the  work  of  propaganda  was  taken  up  with 
missionary  zeal  by  the  "muckrakers,"  a  group  of  publicists 
and  writers  whose  object  it  was  to  inflame  public  opinion 
against  corruption  and  abuses  in  government  and  "big 
business." 

On  the  crest  of  the  wave  of  popular  resentment  thus 
raised  up,  the  leaders  of  the  new  generation  came  into 
power,  the  seventh  political  generation  since  the  natal  days 
of  the  republic.  Unlike  the  elder  leaders,  the  new  statesmen 
were  animated  with  liberal  ideals;  without  regard  to  party 
affiliations  they  labored  for  "progressive"  legislation  and 
strove  for  the  advent  of  a  "new  democracy."  Under  the 
inspiration  of  such  men  as  Bryan,  Roosevelt,  Wilson,  La 
Follette,  Hughes  and  Hiram  Johnson,  they  brought  about  the 
enactment  of  laws  for  the  restraint  of  trusts,  railroads,  land- 
grabbing  corporations  and  the  financial  interests;  the  work 
ing  conditions  of  employees  were  greatly  improved  by  the 
enactment  of  a  wide  variety  of  welfare  legislation;  and  an 
effort  was  made  to  rejuvenate  the  power  of  the  people  in 
governmental  affairs  through  direct  nominations  and  direct 
legislation,  the  granting  of  woman  suffrage  and  the  popular 
election  of  senators.  The  new  measures  were  carried 
through  in  face  of  the  embittered  opposition  of  the  survivors 
of  the  departed  epoch. 

When  the  United  States  entered  the  World  War  in  1917, 
the  signs  of  the  times  indicated  that  the  generation  had  about 
run  its  course.  Its  program  of  domestic  reform  had  been 
enacted;  Roosevelt  passed  away  in  1919,  Wilson,  La  Follette 
and  other  vigorous  reformers  of  an  earlier  day  were  begin 
ning  to  show  signs  of  physical  decline ;  the  adoption  of  fed- 


122  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

eral  suffrage  for  women  suggested  a  point  of  departure  for 
a  new  era.  An  unceasing  criticism  directed  against  the 
foundations  of  the  existing  order  had  been  conducted  by  the 
Socialists  and  other  radical  groups  and  was  apparently  pre 
paring  the  way  for  the  transfer  of  power  to  fresh  hands. 
New  and  lively  issues  were  already  looming  up  which  had 
received  little  serious  consideration  by  those  in  power,  ques 
tions  concerned  with  the  application  of  democratic  principles 
to  industrial  organization  and  with  the  relations  of  the 
United  States  to  the  world  order.  A  leadership  representa 
tive  of  the  new  day  seemed  slow  in  making  its  appearance, 
and  the  presidential  campaign  of  1920  showed  the  country  in 
a  condition  of  drift  awaiting  the  coming  of  new  pilots. 
Future  events  alone  can  supply  the  confirmatory  evidence  to 
show  whether,  as  at  present  seems  likely,  we  are  today 
standing  on  the  threshold  of  the  eighth  generation  of  Ameri 
can  statesmanship. 

IV 

For  confirmed  radicals  and  orthodox  conservatives  this 
survey  of  the  successive  generations  of  American  history 
will  serve  merely  to  reinforce  their  preconceptions  as  to  the 
importance  of  their  respective  theories  of  progress  to  na 
tional  development.  The  one  group  will  find  in  the  evidence 
sufficient  reason  for  maintaining  that  the  American  people 
would  have  fared  better  if  statesmen  of  the  Jeffersonian 
school  had  always  been  at  the  helm.  The  other  will  discover 
justification  for  the  conviction  that  the  nation  made  its  chief 
advances  under  the  guidance  of  statesmen  of  the  Hamiltonian 
school.  The  former  group  will  be  likely  to  stress  the 
dynamic  quality  of  democratic  and  humanitarian  ideals  as 
the  motive  force  of  national  progress.  The  latter  will  point 
to  administrative  efficiency  and  the  stimulation  of  economic 
enterprise  as  supplying  the  chief  impulse  to  national 
achievement. 


RADICALISM  AND  CONSERVATISM        123 

But  to  the  candid  student  of  social  tendencies  it  is  not 
likely  that  either  conclusion  will  prove  wholly  acceptable. 
Beyond  question  the  foregoing  review  yields  two  generali 
zations  which  would  seem  to  be  pregnant  with  significance. 
In  the  first  place,  epochs  of  radicalism  and  conservatism  have 
followed  each  other  in  alternating  order ;  and,  secondly,  with 
the  changing  of  epochs,  leadership  in  public  affairs  has 
passed  from  the  liberals  of  the  one  division  to  the  moderates 
of  the  other  and  vice  versa,  except  in  times  of  war  and  after- 
war  readjustment  when  the  extremists  of  the  one  group  or 
the  other  have  ordinarily  been  in  the  saddle.  Whatever 
fallacies  or  losses  may  be  apparent  to  the  logician  in  such  a 
zigzag  scheme  of  progress,  it  nevertheless  remains  that  in 
America  social  development  has  never  followed  a  straight 
line,  but,  within  limits,  has  been  the  result  of  the  uncon 
scious  employment  by  the  people  of  the  trial-and-error 
method.  Experimentation  and  opportunism,  rather  than 
preconceived  theories,  have  been  the  animating  spirit  of 
American  progress. 

To  the  working  out  of  this  vital  social  process,  both  the 
radical  and  the  conservative  have  made  important  and  essen 
tial  contributions.  Their  mutual  criticism  and  vigilant 
antagonism  have  served  to  keep  America  abreast  the  most 
enlightened  nations  of  the  world  without  the  periodic  re 
course  to  revolutionary  violence  characteristic  of  continental 
European  countries.  The  functioning  of  these  crosscurrents 
and  countercurrents  of  opinion  has  been  made  possible  by 
the  solemn  guarantees,  in  the  state  and  federal  constitutions, 
of  free  speech  and  a  free  press.  If  the  experience  of  the 
past  is  a  dependable  guide  to  the  future,  the  best  assurance  of 
the  peaceful  and  orderly  advance  of  the  people  in  the  future 
would  seem  to  lie  in  a  jealous  regard  for  the  right  of  free 
exchanges  and  comparisons  of  opinion. 

In  conclusion,  this  survey  of  the  procession  of  generations 
suggests  a  criterion  for  analyzing  the  elusive  quality  of 


124  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

greatness,  which  by  general  consent  attaches  to  certain  char 
acters  in  American  history.  Restricting  our  inquiry  to  the 
incumbents  of  the  presidency,  a  consensus  of  opinion  among 
historians  and  publicists  ascribes  preeminence  to  Washing 
ton,  Jefferson,  Jackson  and  Lincoln,  and,  in  a  preliminary 
way,  to  Roosevelt  and  Wilson.  But  what  were  the  tests  and 
standards  that  were  applied  in  making  this  selection?  It  is 
not  to  be  denied  that  this  group  of  foremost  presidents  dif 
fered  from  each  other  in  many  conventional  respects — in 
education,  temperament,  training,  personality,  party  affilia 
tion,  and  attachment  to  specific  public  policies.  Further 
more,  Washington  as  president  was  swayed  by  conservative 
ideals  whereas  the  other  presidents  were  exponents  of  the 
doctrines  of  liberalism  as  understood  by  the  men  of  their  own 
generation.  Evidently  their  title  to  fame  is  not  derived 
from  any  of  the  aptitudes  or  qualities  that  have  been  noted. 
The  answer  to  our  query  has  perhaps  been  reached  by  this 
process  of  elimination.  These  statesmen  enjoyed  one  attri 
bute,  and  one  only,  in  common:  they  were  men  of  elastic 
mind,  sensitive  to  the  quickening  impulses  of  a  new  time, 
swift  to  grasp  a  fresh  vision  of  public  duty  and  to  present 
their  solution  in  a  form  capable  of  rallying  public  opinion  to 
its  support.  Their  ability  to  marshal  the  energies  of  the 
nation  to  meet  the  new  situation  assured  them  of  their  his 
toric  position  among  the  great  leaders  of  the  nation.  Thus 
the  essence  of  greatness,  as  viewed  in  the  perspective  of 
history,  does  not  consist  in  the  ability  to  hold  back  or  even 
to  mark  time  but  in  the  capacity  for  adaptability  to  change, 
in  the  quality  of  leading  the  nation  to  the  acceptance  of  new 
responsibilities  and  larger  opportunities. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

No  comprehensive  study  of  the  historical  significance  of  radical 
ism  and  conservatism  in  the  United  States  has  ever  been  made. 
There  is  real  need  for  such  a  study,  for,  in  the  mind  of  the  average 


RADICALISM  AND  CONSERVATISM         125 

man,  the  whole  subject  has  been  obscured  by  a  cloud  of  misinfor 
mation  and  misrepresentation  growing  out  of  the  political  animosi 
ties  of  the  last  twenty  years.  _ 

It  is  possible  to  find  occasional  passages,  in  the  writings  of  pub 
licists  and  historians,  which  discuss  in  an  instructive  way  the  mean 
ing  of  radicalism  and  conservatism  and  of  the  various  shades  of 
opinion  existing  within  each  school,  as  well  as  the  relation  of  these 
types  of  opinion  to  social  and  institutional  development.  Among 
the  more  luminous  of  such  discussions,  selected  somewhat  at  ran 
dom,  may  be  cited :  John  Dewey's  "How  Reaction  Helps"  in  the 
New  Republic,  vol.  xxiv,  pp.  21-22;  A.  V.  Dicey's  "An  English  View 
of  American  Conservatism"  in  Gustav  Pollak's  Fifty  Years  of 
American  Idealism.  The  New  York  Nation,  1865-1915  (Boston, 
1915 )»  PP-  309-324;  Guy  Emerson's  essay  "What  Is  a  Liberal?"  in 
his  The  New  Frontier  (New  York,  1920)  ;  Ralph  Waldo  Emerson's 
"The  Conservative"  in  his  Complete  Works  (12  v. ;  New  York, 
n.  d.),  vol.  i,  pp.  279-307;  Henry  Jones  Ford's  "Radicalism  in  Ameri 
can  Politics"  in  the  Yale  Review,  vol.  ix,  pp.  759-770;  editorial 
entitled  "In  the  Vein  of  Intimacy"  in  the  Freeman,  March  31,  1920; 
William  J.  Kirby's  "The  Natural  History  of  a  Reform  Law"  in  the 
Catholic  World,  vol.  102,  pp.  145-159;  W.  E.  H.  Lecky's  A  History 
of  England  in  the  Eighteenth  Century  (8  v. ;  New  York,  1892-1893), 
vol.  i,  pp.  16-19,  vol.  ii,  pp.  95-97;  Walter  Lippman's  A  Preface  to 
Politics  (New  York,  1913),  pp.  86-105,  and  his  Drift  and  Mastery 
(New  York,  1914),  chaps,  ix,  xii-xiv,  xvi;  Brander  Matthews'  essay 
on  "Reform  and  Reformers"  in  The  American  of  the  Future  (New 
York,  1909);  John  Morley's  On  Compromise  (London,  1896),  pp. 
201-265;  James  Harvey  Robinson's  The  Mind  in  the  Making  (New 
York,  1921),  passim;  E.  A.  Ross's  Social  Control  (New 
York,  1901),  chap,  xv ;  Bertrand  Russell's  "Individual  Liberty  and 
Public  Control"  in  the  Atlantic  Monthly,  vol.  cxx,  pp.  112-120; 
Mowry  Saben's  "Conservatism  and  Reform"  in  the  Forum,  vol.  48, 
pp.  35-44;  Thorstein  Veblen's  The  Theory  of  the  Leisure  Class 
(New  York,  1915),  p.  190  et  seq.  The  foregoing  discussions  con 
sider  the  subject  from  widely  differing  angles  and  do  not  agree  in 
many  respects  with  the  point  of  view  presented  by  the  present 
writer.  The  Cyclopedia  of  American  Goz'ernment  (3  v.  edited  by 
Andrew  Cunningham  McLaughlin  and  Albert  Bushnell  Hart;  New 
York,  1913),  which  was  intended  to  codify  contemporary  specialized 
thought  in  political  science  and  American  history,  does  not  include 
radicalism  or  conservatism  among  the  subjects  for  treatment. 


CHAPTER  VI 

THE  ROLE  OF  WOMEN  IN  AMERICAN   HISTORY 

An  examination  of  the  standard  histories  of  the  United 
States  and  of  the  history  textbooks  in  use  in  our  schools 
raises  the  pertinent  question  whether  women  have  ever  made 
any  contributions  to  American  national  progress  that  are 
worthy  of  record.  If  the  silence  of  the  historians  is  taken  to 
mean  anything,  it  would  appear  that  one-half  of  our  popula 
tion  have  been  negligible  factors  in  our  country's  history. 

Before  accepting  the  truth  of  this  assumption,  the  facts  of 
our  history  need  to  be  raked  over  from  a  new  point  of  view. 
It  should  not  be  forgotten  that  all  of  our  great  historians 
have  been  men  and  were  likely  therefore  to  be  influenced  by 
a  sex  interpretation  of  history  all  the  more  potent  because 
unconscious.  Furthermore,  while  it  is  indisputable  that  the 
commanding  positions  in  politics,  diplomacy,  and  the  army 
have  always  been  held  by  men,  it  is  also  true  that  our  ideas  of 
what  is  important  in  our  past  have  greatly  changed  in  recent 
years. 

If,  as  the  following  sketch  seeks  to  show,  the  women  of 
the  nation  have  played  their  full  part  in  American  develop 
ment,  thg  pall  pi  silence  which  historians  have  allowed  to  rest 
over  their  services  and  achievements  may  possibly  constitute 
the  chief  reason  why  the  women  have  been  so  slow  in  gain 
ing  equal  rights  with  the  men  in  this  the  greatest  democracy 
in  the  world.  The  men  of  the  nation  have,  perhaps  not 
unnaturally,  felt  disinclined  to  endow  with  equality  a  class 
of  persons  who,  so  far  as  they  knew,  had  never  proved  their 

126 


ROLE  OF  WOMEN  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY     127 

fitness  for  public  service  and  leadership  in  the  past  history  of 
the  country.  Any  consideration  of  woman's  part  in  Ameri 
can  history  must  include  the  protracted  struggle  of  the  sex 
for  larger  rights  and  opportunities,  a  story  that  in  itself  is 
one  of  the  noblest  chapters  in  the  history  of  American 
democracy. 


Although  a  queen  as  well  as  a  king  gave  encouragement  to 
Christopher  Columbus  and  it  was  under  another  queen  that 
the  first  English  settlements  in  America  were  projected, 
colonization  in  the  New  World  was  not  an  unmixed  blessing 
for  the  women  settlers.  It  was  theirs  to  share  the  hardships 
and  perils  of  wilderness  life  in  equal  part  with  the  men,  but 
to  them  came  little  of  the  glory  and  none  of  the  legal  advan 
tages  which  the  men  derived  by  fleeing  from  the  Old  World. 
In  1920  Europe  and  America  joined  in  celebrating  the  three- 
hundredth  anniversary  of  the  voyage  of  the  Mayflower.  The 
courage  and  achievements  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers  were  com 
memorated  in  detail ;  but  very  little  was  said  about  the 
Pilgrim  Mothers,  who  formed  thirty-two  of  the  one  hundred 
and  twenty  passengers  but  whose  names  were  not  permitted 
to  appear  on  the  civil  compact  which  was  signed  by  the 
settlers  upon  their  arrival  at  Provincetown. 

For  the  great  majority  of  colonial  women,  life  was  much 
as  former  President  Eliot  has  described  it :  "Generations  of 
them  cooked,  carried  water,  washed  and  made  clothes,  bore 
children  in  lonely  peril,  and  tried  to  bring  them  up  safely 
through  all  sorts  of  physical  exposure  without  medical  or 
surgical  help,  lived  themselves  in  terror  of  savages,  in  terror 
of  the  wilderness,  and  under  the  burden  of  a  sad  and  cruel 
creed,  and  sank  at  last  into  nameless  graves,  without  any 
vision  of  the  grateful  days  when  millions  of  their  descend 
ants  should  rise  up  and  call  them  blessed." 


128  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

The  rapid  increase  of  the  colonial  population  was  due,  in 
great  part,  to  the  large  families  which  the  women  brought 
into  the  world.  The  generosity  of  nature  in  a  sparsely  popu 
lated  country  removed  any  economic  barrier  to  the  rearing 
of  a  large  number  of  children.  Even  in  the  upper  levels  of 
society  girls  often  married  when  they  were  fifteen  or  sixteen ; 
and  to  be  without  a  husband  at  twenty-five  was  the  certain 
sign  of  an  "ancient  maid."  John  Marshall,  the  later  chief 
justice,  fell  in  love  with  his  wife  when  she  was  fourteen  and 
married  her  at  sixteen.  From  early  marriages  ordinarily 
came  families  of  ten  and  twelve  children.  Anne  Hutchinson 
was  the  mother  of  fifteen  children.  Sir  William  Phipps  was 
one  of  twenty-six  children  by  the  same  mother.  Most  of  the 
large  families  were  the  offspring  of  at  least  two  mothers, 
a  fact  that  requires  no  further  comment. 

Women  were  sometimes  to  be  found  in  business  in  a  small 
way.  This  came  about  ordinarily  as  a  result  of  the  death  of 
the  husband  or  other  provider.  Advertisements  in  the 
colonial  press  show  a  wide  range  of  such  employments — 
shop-keeping,  jelly-making,  wax- working,  embroidering,  and 
the  like.  Benjamin  Franklin's  sister-in-law  followed  a 
familiar  custom  of  widows  in  taking  over  her  husband's 
newspaper  business  upon  his  death.  But  in  general  the 
sphere  in  which  women  might  move  was  severely  restricted 
and  jealously  guarded  by  the  men  of  the  age,  who  cherished 
the  Old  World  idea  of  women  as  inferior  beings.  Now  and 
then  a  woman  sought  to  violate  this  convention  only  to  be 
met  by  the  contumely  or  persecution  of  the  dominant  sex. 
In  1638  Mistress  Anne  Hutchinson  was  brought  to  trial  for 
sedition  and  heresy  in  Puritan  Massachusetts  because  she 
had  instructed  the  women  of  the  neighborhood  in  religious 
precepts  accorafingr"t(J~tieT~  own  understanding.  She  was 
excommunicated  from  the  church  and  banished  from  the 
colony,  for  she  had  committed  two  unpardonable  sins:  she 


ROLE  OF  WOMEN  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY    129 

had  criticised  the  teachings  of  the  men  in  authority,  and  she 
had  set  herself  up  to  preach,  the  latter  being  forbidden  by 
the  solemn  injunction  of  St.  Paul.  When  she  and  her  house 
hold  were  murdered  by  the  Indians  a  few  years  later,  John 
WTinthrop,  first  governor  of  Massachusetts,  wrote  piously: 
"God's  hand  is  the  more  apparently  seen  therein,  to  pick  out 
this  woful  woman  to  make  her  and  those  belonging  to  her,  an 
unheard  of  heavy  example  of  their  cruelty."  It  was  not 
vouchsafed  him  to  understand  that  she  had  taken  up  the 
weapons  where  the  Puritans  had  laid  them  down  to  do  her 
part  in  the  long  battle  for  freedom  of  thought  and  speech, 
for  religious  toleration  and  for  a  true  democracy  in  religion. 
Anne  Hutchinson's  experience  was  significant  of  the 
special  ban  under  which  women  were  compelled  to  live  by 
law  and  custom  during  colonial  times  and,  indeed,  for  many 
years  thereafter.  The  principles  of  the  English  common 
law  iullowed  the  colonists  to  America,  fixed  the  legal  restric 
tions  and  colored  the  social  restraints  which  regulated 
woman's  conduct.  The  unmarried  woman  was  in  most 
respects  equal  to  a  manm  the  eyes  oTlhe  law,  but  custom 
and  economic  pressure  forced  her  to  marry  at  an  early  age 
and  matrimony  reduced  her  to  a  subordinate  and  cramped 
position.  She  was  expected  to  embrace  her  husband's  re 
ligion,  to  confine  her  activities  to  the  home,  and  to  make 
her  husband's  pleasure  her  guiding  star.  By  the  law  her 
husband  became  her  baron  or  lord  and  she  ceased  to  have 
a  separate  existence  to  most  intents  and  purposes.  She  lost 
the  title  to  all  her  personal  property,  even  though  it  had  been 
acquired  before  her  marriage,  and  she  forfeited  all  personal 
control  over  her  real  property  as  long  as  the  marriage  lasted. 
If  a  wife  earned  money  outside  the  home,  the  husband  was 
entitled  to  her  wages  just  as  he  was  to  those  of  a  minor 
child.  He  had  the  right  of  controlling  and  punishing  her 
conduct  in  the  same  degree  as  he  did  his  children.  The 


130  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

mother  had  no  right  to  the  custody  of  her  own  children,  for 
the  father  was  the  sole  guardian  during  his  lifetime  and 
could  dispose  of  the  children  by  will  at  his  death.  Con 
versely  the  husband  was  held  responsible  for  many  of  the 
torts  and  crimes  committed  by  his  wife,  and  was  entitled  to 
collect  damages  for  injuries  inflicted  upon  his  wife. 

Under  the  circumstances  it  is  not  surprising  that  women 
were  not  expected  to  be  educated  and  that  ordinarily  the 
obstacles  in  the  way  of  their  education  were  so  great  that 
most  women  could  neither  read  nor  write.  Even  such 
superior  women  as  Mercy  Warren,  the  sister  of  James  Otis, 
and  Abigail  Adams,  the  spouse  of  John  Adams,  felt  handi 
capped  by  the  lack  of  early  educational  advantages.  The 
J,ew  girls^choolsjof  the  time  were  limited  to  terms  of  a  few 
months  each,  and  the  main  subjects  taught  were  needlework, 
music,  dancing,  and  the  cultivation  of  manners  and  morals. 
Women  were  practically  unknown  as  participants  in  govern 
ment,  although  it  appears  that  some  of  them  possessed  the 
franchise  for  a  period  of  years  in  colonial  Massachusetts. 

Notwithstanding  these  restraints  and  handicaps  the  mass 
of  women  were  not  discontented;  and  whenever  occasion 
arose,  they  performed  their  full  share  with  the  men  in  the 
promotion  of  the  public  weal.  Their  labors  were  then 
greeted  with  masculine  applause,  for  it  was  only  when  they 
worked  for  objects  apart  from  the  men  or  contrary  to  their 
immediate  interests  that  they  were  regarded  as  unsexed  and 
'hideous  to  the  dispassionate  gaze.  In  the  critical  years  pre 
ceding  the  War  for  Independence  the  women  threw  them 
selves  heart  and  soul  into  the  struggle  for  liberty,  stimulating 
their  men  folks  and  supplementing  their  efforts.  At  the  time 
of  the  Stamp  Act  women  in  all  the  colonies  banded  together 
in  societies  for  the  making  of  homespun;  and  in  Rhode 
Island  the  maidens  solemnly  resolved  that  they  would  not 
receive  the  addresses  of  any  suitors  who  favored  the  Stamp 


ROLE  OF  WOMEN  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY     131 

Act.  In  later  crises  they  formed  anti-tea  leagues  and  agreed 
to  abstain  from  the  use  of  imported  fineries.  Newspapers 
owned  by  women  in  Rhode  Island,  Maryland,  Virginia  and 
South  Carolina  went  the  whole  distance  with  the  other  patriot 
papers  in  promoting  radical  propaganda.  When  a  patriot 
convention  of  men  in  North  Carolina  adopted  comprehensive 
regulations  of  non-importation,  non-consumption  and  non- 
exportation  in  1774,  the  ladies  of  Edenton  signed  an  agree 
ment  declaring:  "It  is  a  duty  that  we  owe  not  only  to  our 
near  and  dear  relations  and  connexions  but  to  ourselves,  who 
are  essentially  interested  in  their  welfare,  to  do  everything 
as  far  as  lies  in  our  power  to  testify  our  sincere  adherence 
to  the  same." 

The  spirit  of  such  women  is  excellently  reflected  by  a  letter 
written  shortly  before  the  Declaration  of  Independence  by 
a  Philadelphia  lady  to  a  friend  in  the  army:  "I  have  re 
trenched  every  superfluous  expense  in  my  table  and  family; 
tea  I  have  not  drunk  since  last  Christmas  nor  bought  a  new 
cap  or  gown  since  your  defeat  at  Lexington;  and  what  I 
never  did  before  have  learned  to  knit  and  am  now  making 
stockings  of  American  wool  for  my  servants;  and  this  way 
do  I  throw  in  my  mite  to  the  public  good.  I  know  this — 
that  as  free  I  can  die  but  once;  but  as  a  slave  I  shall  not 
be  worthy  of  life.  I  have  the  pleasure  to  assure  you  that 
these  are  the  sentiments  of  all  my  sister  Americans." 

But  the  Declaration  of  Independence  when  it  was  adopted 
opened  no  new  vistas  to  women  as  a  sex.  The  statement 
that  "all  men  are  created  equal"  was  understood  in  a  strictly 
sex  sense.  Indeed,  Abigail  Adams,  the  stout-hearted  spouse 
of  John  Adams,  wrote  to  her  husband,  then  in  the  Conti 
nental  Congress:  "I  cannot  say,  that  I  think  you  are  very 
generous  to  the  ladies ;  for,  whilst  you  are  proclaiming  peace 
and  good-will  to  men,  emancipating  all  nations,  you  insist 
upon  retaining  an  absolute  power  over  wives.  But  you  must 


132  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

remember,  ..."  she  added  with  humorous  asperity,  "we 
have  it  in  our  power,  not  only  to  free  ourselves,  but  to  subdue 
our  masters,  and,  without  violence,  throw  both  your  natural 
and  legal  authority  at  our  feet." 

In  the  War  for  Independence  that  ensued  the  women 
made  sacrifices  and  contributed  services  that  were  as  essential 
to  the  success  of  the  cause  as  the  exploits  of  the  soldiers  in 
the  field.  They  tilled  the  farms  and  garnered  the  crops  while 
the  men  were  away ;  they  made  munitions,  using  their  pewter 
ware  for  bullets ;  they  spun  and  wove  and  made  uniforms 
and  hospital  supplies.  Some  gave  their  own  property,  others 
went  from  house  to  house  to  solicit  contributions  for  the 
army.  They  carried  supplies  to  the  army,  often  at  the  risk 
of  their  own  lives ;  they  visited  hospitals  and  prisons,  seeking 
to  relieve  suffering  and  distress.  Some  even  served  in  the 
ranks.  The  possibilities  of  organized  feminine  effort  in 
relief  work  were  for  the  first  time  shown  in  1780  by  the 
labors  of  the  women  of  Philadelphia  under  the  direction  of 
Esther  De  Berdt  Reed  and  Sarah  Franklin  Bache.  Their 
object  was  to  supply  the  destitute  soldiers  with  clothing;  and 
by  dint  of  their  efforts  $7,500  in  specie  was  collected  for  the 
purchase  of  materials.  Throughout  the  war  the  women  per 
formed  their  work  without  any  thought  of  recognition  or 
reward;  and  when  the  days  of  peace  finally  returned,  they 
quietly  sank  back  in  their  places  and  took  up  the  old  endless 
routine  of  their  existence. 

II 

The  epic  story  of  the  westward  march  of  population  is 
usually  related  in  terms  of  men;  but  no  proper  conception 
of  the  subjugation  of  the  wilderness  by  the  forces  of  civiliza 
tion  can  be  gained  without  an  appreciation  of  the  part  that 
the  women  pioneers  played.  Women  were  not  among  the 
first  adventurers  into  the  wilds;  they  were  preceded  by  the 


ROLE  OF  WOMEN  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY     133 

trappers,  prospectors  and  cattle  rangers.  These  soldiers  of 
fortune  introduced  an  unfettered  and  lawless  mode  of  exist 
ence.  Wherever  they  went  saloons  and  gambling  houses 
flourished;  shooting  affrays  and  lynchings  were  common 
occurrences.  But  as  the  frontier  grew  older,  farmers  began 
to  appear  with  their  womenkind,  animated  with  the  purpose 
of  founding  permanent  homes.  The  West  of  Bret  Harte 
began  to  give  way  to  the  West  of  Hamlin  Garland.  The 
presence  of  women  necessitated  a  new  order  of  society; 
civilized  conduct  began  to  take  the  place  of  frontier  rowdyism 
and  lawlessness,  and  peaceful  and  law-abiding  communities 
developed. 

The  material  conditions  of  early  colonial  life  were  repro 
duced  with  each  new  advance  of  the  frontier  to  the  west. 
It  was  necessary  for  every  man,  woman  and  child  to  work 
to  help  support  the  family.  The  women  not  only  did  the 
hard  housework,  including  spinning  and  weaving,  but  most 
of  them  also  assisted  their  husbands  to  erect  the  cabins,  till 
the  fields,  and  beat  off  attacks  of  the  savage  enemy.  On 
them  also  devolved  jt^entirejta^sk  of  educating  the  .children. 
Large  families  were  the  rule.  As  one  writer  has  said,  the 
woman  pioneer  "was  lonesome  until  she  had  a  half-dozen 
children  about  her.  She  did  not  begin  to  feel  crowded  in 
the  single  room  until  the  second  dozen  began  coming."  The 
frontier  women  were  a  picked  lot  physically ;  otherwise  they 
could  not  have  withstood  the  rigors  of  life  in  an  undeveloped 
country. 

While  women  were  faring  forth  with  their  men  folk  to  a 
precarious  life  on  the  frontier,  many  of  their  sisters  who 
remained  in  the  East  found  the  conditions  of  their  life 
fundamentally  altered  through  no  act  of  their  own.  In 
New  England  and  the  Middle  Atlantic  states  women  were 
beginning  for  the  first  time  to  enter  factory  work  in  the 
years  following  the  War  of  1812.  The  growth  of  textile 


134  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

manufacturing  had  created  a  demand  for  wage  labor;  and 
in  order  not  to  interfere  with  hired  help  on  the  farm,  the 
mill  owners  looked  to  the  women  as  an  important  source  of 
labor  supply.  With  our  modern  ideas  of  such  things  it  is 
a  surprising  fact  that  many  years  before  both  Washington 
and  Hamilton  had  anticipated  such  a  culmination,  and  had 
expressed  their  full  approval  of  the  employment  of  women 
and  children  in  factories.  The  working  day  of  both  women 
and  children,  like  that  of  the  men,  extended  from  sunrise  to 
sunset ;  and  wages  were  miserably  low.  Generally  speaking, 
women  and  girls  formed  from  two-thirds  to  three- fourths 
of  the  total  number  of  factory  workers  in  the  first  half  of 
the  nineteenth  century,  and  in  some  places  as  much  as  nine- 
tenths.  Without  their  help  it  is  doubtful  whether  the  textile 
industry  could  have  flourished,  for  it  was  not  until  after  1850 
that  cheap  labor  became  plentiful  in  the  form  of  European 
immigrants. 

When  women  stepped  from  the  spinning  wheel  at  home 
to  the  spinning  jenny  in  the  mill,  they  did  not  enter  a  new 
field  of  work,  although  they  were  working  under  radically 
changed  conditions.  The  break  once  made,  new  occupations 
and  trades  opened  to  them  because  of  the  cheapness  of  their 
hire.  By  1840  women  were  employed  in  more  than  one 
hundred  different  occupations,  although  the  great  majority 
of  the  women  outside  of  the  factories  worked  as  seamstresses 
and  tailoresses,  and  teaching  was  the  only  field  open  to 
educated  women^  The  age-long  idea  of  the  family,  accord 
ing  to  which  the  interests  of  the  mother  and  children  were 
restricted  to  the  home,  was  thus  in  process  of  being  under 
mined.  Notwithstanding  the  miserable  and  discriminatory 
conditions  under  which  women  were  obliged  to  work,  the 
day  of  woman's  economic  independence  of  man  was  begin 
ning  to  dawn. 

In  most  other  respects  the  position  of  women  in  the  first 


ROLE  OF  WOMEN  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY    135 

half  of  the  nineteenth  century  remained  as  of  yore.  Catherine 
E.  Beecher,  sister  of  Henry  Ward  Beecher,  writing  about 
1840,  voiced  the  dominant  opinion  of  the  age  when  she  wrote: 
"Heaven  has  appointed  to  one  sex  the  superior,  and  to  the 
other  the  subordinate,  station.  ...  It  is  therefore  as  much 
for  the  dignity  as  it  is  for  the  interest  of  females,  in  all 
respects  to  conform  to  the  duties  of  this  relation.  And  it 
is  as  much  a  duty  as  it  is  for  the  child  to  fulfill  similar  rela 
tions  to  parents,  or  subjects  to  rulers."  Or  as  Miss  Barber 
put  it  in  the  Madison  (Georgia)  Visitor:  "It  is  written  in 
the  volume  of  inspiration  as  plainly  as  if  traced  in  sunbeams, 
that  man,  the  creature  of  God's  own  image,  is  superior  to 
woman.  ..."  Thus  the  legal  status  of  women  yielded  but 
slowly  to  change,  and  the  feminine  intellect  was  hardly  more 
esteemed  than  in  colonial  times.  Such  educational  facilities 
as  were  afforded  in  the  early  decades  of  the  century  were 
meager,  and  the  purpose  of  "female  education"  was  to  pre 
pare  the  pupils  to  attract  men  and  gain  husbands.  As  an 
exception  to  the  rule  Emma  Willard  founded  a  seminary  with 
government  aid  in  New  York  in  1819  and  sought  to  direct 
the  education  of  women  along  more  self-respecting  lines. 
The  usual  experience  was  that  of  Susan  B.  Anthony,  whose 
teachers  would  not  instruct  her  in  long  division  nor  under 
stand  why  a  girl  should  insist  upon  wanting  to  learn  it. 
Periodicals  for  women  began  to  make  their  appearance,  most 
of  them  edited  by  men.  Their  type  is  well  illustrated  by 
the  most  popular  of  them  all,  Godey's  Lady's  Book,  filled 
with  fashion  pictures  and  stories  of  saccharine  morality. 

Notwithstanding  the  condition  in  which  the  mass  of 
women  found  themselves,  or  rather  because  of  this  fact,  the 
first  organized  movement  for  women's  rights  had  its  rise  in 
this  period.  The  courageous  souls  who  inaugurated  the 
movement  had  not  merely  to  brave  the  fierce  contempt  of  the 
men  as  well  as  most  of  their  own  sex  but  they  stood  in 


136  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

constant  peril  of  physical  violence  at  the  hands  of  infuriated 
mobs.  The  battle  of  Anne  Hutchison  for  the  right  to  speak 
her  mind  in  public  had  to  be  fought  all  over  again.  As 
Miss  Ida  Tarbell  has  said,  "they  had  to  fight  for  the  right 
of  fighting  wrongs";  and  St.  Paul's  dictum  was  again  and 
again  thundered  at  them  from  pulpit  and  press:  "But  I 
suffer  not  a  woman  to  teach,  nor  to  usurp  authority  over 
the  man,  but  to  be  in  silence"  (I  Timothy,  ii,  12).  It  was 
the  penchant  of  women  for  humanitarian  reform,  their  in 
terest  in  the  cause  of  oppressed  humanity,  that  launched  them 
upon  their  long  and  stormy  voyage  for  sex  equality.  The 
temperance  question — which  first  aroused  the  reforming  zeal 
of  Susan  B.  Anthony — the  transcendentalist  movement,  labor 
welfare,  and,  above  all,  the  anti-slavery  agitation,  derived 
indispensable  support  from  an  earnest,  self-sacrificing  minor 
ity  of  women  in  all  parts  of  the  country. 

The  first  impulse  to  this  new  phase  of  feminine  activity 
was  given  by  the  visit  of  the  Scotchwoman  Frances  Wright 
to  this  country  in  1820.  A  girl  of  twenty-two,  she  had  the 
distinction  of  being  the  first  woman  lecturer  on  lay  subjects 
in  this  country.  Her  advanced  ideas  on  slavery,  theology 
and  woman's  rights  gave  offense  to  both  press  and  ministry, 
but  did  not  prevent  her  from  returning  to  America  several 
years  later  and  giving  new  momentum  to  the  cause  of  human 
betterment.  In  1828  came  the  Grimke  sisters  from  South 
Carolina,  who  after  having  emancipated  their  slaves  betook 
themselves  north  to  devote  the  remainder  of  their  lives  and 
wealth  to  the  cause  of  abolition.  About  the  same  time 
Lucretia  Mott,  a  Quaker  of  Philadelphia,  began  her  active 
work  in  the  promotion  of  anti-slavery,  woman's  rights  and 
the  other  reforms  of  the  time. 

When  the  American  Anti- Slavery  Society  was  founded  in 
Philadelphia  in  1833  under  the  inspiration  of  William  Lloyd 
Garrison,  women  took  part  in  the  meeting  although  they 


ROLE  OF  WOMEN  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY    137 

were  not  formally  received  as  members.  Immediately  there 
after  the  women  of  the  city  formed  the  Philadelphia  Female 
Anti-Slavery  Society ;  and  so  successful  did  the  organization 
prove  to  be  that  a  few  years  later  the  first  national  convention 
of  American  anti-slavery  women  was  held  in  New  York  City. 
By  this  time  women  in  many  parts  of  the  North  were  taking 
active  part  in  the  anti-slavery  struggle  through  circulating 
petitions,  holding  prayer  meetings  and  conventions,  and 
raising  large  sums  of  money  by  fairs.  An  effort  was  made 
to  stem  the  tide  by  a  pastoral  letter  issued  by  the  Massachu 
setts  Association  of  Congregational  Ministers  in  1837,  which 
declared  that  "perplexed  and  agitating  subjects"  should  not 
be  forced  upon  any  church  and  that  the  new  practices 
threatened  "the  female  character  with  widespread  and  per 
manent  injury.  ...  If  the  vine  ...  thinks  to  assume  the 
independent  and  overshadowing  nature  of  the  elm,  it  will 
not  only  cease  to  bear  fruit,  but  fall  in  shame  and  dishonor 
into  the  dust."  When  the  second  convention  of  the  women 
was  being  held  in  Philadelphia  in  1838,  the  hall  in  which  they 
met  was  surrounded  all  day  by  an  enraged  mob,  and  when 
the  convention  adjourned  for  the  evening  the  building  was 
plundered  and  burnt.  The  following  year  the  women  asked 
equality  with  the  men  in  the  American  Anti- Slavery  Society ; 
but  this  request  caused  such  a  violent  controversy  among  the 
masculine  friends  of  negro  rights  that  the  society  split,  one 
wing  led  by  Garrison  merging  with  the  women  and  the  other 
organizing  a  new  society. 

In  1840  occurred  an  event  which  called  dramatic  attention 
to  the  unequal  position  of  women  and  led  directly  to  the 
organization  of  a  militant  woman's  rights  movement.  A 
World's  Anti-Slavery  Convention  was  held  in  London,  to 
which  delegates  had  been  invited  from  all  anti-slavery 
societies.  When  several  American  women,  duly  accredited 
as  delegates,  sought  admission,  they  were  excluded  by  a  large 


138  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

vote  on  account  of  their  sex.  This  affront  caused  two  of 
the  delegates,  Lucretia  Mott  and  Elizabeth  Cady  Stanton,  to 
resolve  that  on  their  return  to  America  they  would  leave  no 
stone  unturned  to  remove  all  distinctions  between  the  sexes. 
Several  years  passed  before  they  were  ready  to  launch  their 
movement.  Finally  in  1848  they  joined  with  Martha  C. 
Wright  and  Mary  Ann  McClintock  in  issuing  a  call  for  a 
woman's  rights  convention,  the  first  of  its  kind  in  the  history 
of  the  world. 

The  meeting  was  held  on  July  19,  1848,  at  Seneca  Falls, 
New  York,  and  was  counted  a  complete  success  by  all  who 
attended.  Its  concrete  outcome  was  an  impressive  declara 
tion  of  sentiments  patterned  closely  upon  the  Declaration  of 
Independence.  It  read  in  part  as  follows: 

When  in  the  course  of  human  events  it  becomes  neces 
sary  for  one  portion  of  the  family  of  man  to  assume  among 
the  people  of  the  earth  a  position  different  from  that  which 
they  have  hitherto  occupied,  ...  a  decent  respect  to  the 
opinions  of  mankind  requires  that  they  should  declare  the 
causes  that  impel  them  to  such  a  course. 

We  hold  these  truths  to  be  self-evident :  that  all  men  and 
women  are  created  equal;  that  they  are  endowed  by  their 
Creator  with  certain  inalienable  rights;  that  among  these 
are  life,  liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness.  .  .  .  When 
ever  any  form  of  government  becomes  destructive  of  these 
ends,  it  is  the  right  of  those  who  suffer  from  it  to  refuse 
allegiance  to  it.  ... 

The  history  of  mankind  is  a  history  of  repeated  injuries 
and  usurpations  on  the  part  of  man  toward  woman,  having 
in  direct  object  the  establishment  of  an  absolute  tyranny 
over  her.  To  prove  this,  let  facts  be  submitted  to  a  candid 
world. 

He  has  never  permitted  her  to  exercise  her  inalienable 
right  to  the  elective  franchise. 

He  has  compelled  her  to  submit  to  laws,  in  the  formation 
of  which  she  had  no  voice.  .  .  . 

He  has  made  her,  if  married,  in  the  eye  of  the  law, 
civilly  dead. 


ROLE  OF  WOMEN  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY     139 

In  the  covenant  of  marriage,  she  is  compelled  to  promise 
obedience  to  her  husband,  he  becoming  to  all  intents  and 
purposes  her  master — the  law  giving  him  power  to  deprive 
her  of  her  liberty,  and  to  administer  chastisement.  .  .  . 

He  has  monopolized  nearly  all  the  profitable  employ 
ments.  ...  t 

He  has  denied  her  the  facilities  for  obtaining  a  thorough  \ 
education,  all  colleges  being  closed  against  her.  .  .  . 

He  has  created  a  false  public  sentiment  by  giving  to  the 
world  a  different  code  of  morals  for  men  and  women.  .  .  . 

He  has  usurped  the  prerogative  of  Jehovah  himself,  claim 
ing  it  as  his  right  to  assign  her  a  sphere  of  action,  when 
that  belongs  to  her  conscience  and  to  her  God. 

He  has  endeavored,  in  every  way  that  he  could,  to  destroy^ 
her  confidence  in  her  own  powers,  to  lessen  her  self-respect,  '• 
and  to  make  her  willing  to  lead  a  dependent  and  abject  life.  } 

Now,  in  view  of  this  entire  disfranchisement  of  one-half 
the  people  of  this  country,  their  social  and  religious  degra 
dation,  .  .  .  we  insist  that  they  have  immediate  admission 
to  all  the  rights  and  privileges  which  belong  to  them  as 
citizens  of  the  United  States.  .  .  . 

The  success  of  this  first  experimental  meeting  caused 
woman's  rights  conventions  to  be  of  almost  yearly  occur 
rence  until  the  outbreak  of  the  Civil  War,  when  the  leaders 
merged  all  lesser  interests  in  the  national  cause.  Contem 
porary  opinion  of  these  "Tomfoolery  Conventions"  is 
picturesquely  expressed  in  the  following  editorial  from  the 
Syracuse  Daily  Star:  "The  poor  creatures  who  take  part  in 
the  silly  rant  of  'brawling  women'  and  Aunt  Nancy  men, 
are  most  of  them  'ismizers'  of  the  rankest  stamp,  Abolition 
ists  of  the  most  frantic  and  contemptible  kind,  and  Christian 
(?)  sympathizers  with  such  heretics  as  Wm.  Lloyd  Garrison, 
Parker  Pillsbury,  C.  C.  Burleigh,  and  S.  S.  Foster.  These 
men  are  all  Woman's  Righters,  and  preachers  of  such  dam 
nable  doctrines  and  accursed  heresies,  as  would  make  demons 
of  the  pit  shudder  to  hear." 

The  ridicule  and  vituperation  of  the  press  and  pulpit 
seemed  merely  to-  spur  the  leaders  to  greater  endeavors 


140  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

although  it  undoubtedly  prevented  thousands  of  less  confi 
dent  members  of  the  sex  from  declaring  their  allegiance  to 
the  movement.  Many  prominent  men  lent  their  support. 
The  great  anti-slavery  agitators,  Garrison  and  Wendell 
Phillips,  spoke  at  their  meetings;  Ralph  Waldo  Emerson, 
John  Greenleaf  Whittier  and  Horace  Greeley  wrote  and 
lectured  in  their  behalf.  Far  in  the  West  Abraham  Lincoln 
approved  the  principle  of  sharing  the  government  with  those 
who  bore  its  burdens,  "by  no  means  excluding  the  women." 
The  three  decades  of  feminine  self-assertion  closing  in 
1850  had  not  been  without  effect  in  bettering  the  condition 
of  women  as  a  sex.  However  reluctantly  the  new  gospel 
was  received,  gradual  but  certain  improvements  in  the  legal 
and  social  position  of  women  began  to  appear  in  various 
parts  of  the  country.  In  1839  Mississippi  granted  to  married 
women  the  control  of  their  own  property;  and  in  the  next 
decade  similar  laws  were  passed  in  Texas,  Indiana,  Pennsyl 
vania,  New  York,  California  and  Wisconsin.  In  1836  the 
first  woman's  seminary  of  college  rank,  Mt.  Holyoke,  was 
opened  at  South  Hadley  by  Mary  Lyon.  The  project  of  co 
education  was  an  even  more  daring  venture,  but  in  1833 
Oberlin  College  was  founded  and  from  the  outset  admitted 
men  and  women  on  equal  terms.  Twenty  years  later  the 
second  co-educational  college,  Antioch,  was  opened  by 
Horace  Mann  at  Yellowsprings,  near  Xenia,  Ohio.  When 
the  State  University  of  Iowa  opened  its  doors  in  1855,  it 
set  a  bold  example  for  other  state  universities  by  admitting 
women  to  its  first  classes ;  but  three  years  later  when  several 
young  women  applied  for  admission  to  the  University  of 
Michigan,  their  request  was  refused. 

in 

In  the  exciting  decade  preceding  the  Civil  War  the  influ 
ence  of  women  continued  to  be  felt  in  all  forward-looking 


ROLE  OF  WOMEN  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY     141 

movements.  It  was  during  these  years  that  Dorothea  Dix 
performed  her  great  work  in  securing  the  reorganization  and 
proper  construction  of  asylums  for  the  insane.  Her  services 
were  epoch-making  in  the  history  of  public  philanthropy, 
especially  in  the  West  and  the  South,  but  she  met  with  one 
tragic  disappointment  when  in  1854  President  Pierce  vetoed 
a  bill  she  had  finally  induced  Congress  to  pass,  granting  ten 
million  acres  of  public  land  for  the  purpose  of  aiding  the 
states  to  care  for  the  insane.  In  New  York  state  the  women 
formed  secret  societies  called  the  Daughters  of  Temperance, 
and  some  zealous  individuals  took  the  law  into  their  own 
hands,  visiting  saloons,  breaking  windows  and  emptying 
whiskey  barrels  into  the  street. 

Women  were  now  emboldened  to  make  their  initial  appear 
ance  in  the  professions.  The  first  woman  to  receive  a 
diploma  in  medicine  after  completing  the  regular  college 
course  was  Elizabeth  Blackwell,  who  attained  that  distinction 
in  Geneva,  New  York,  in  1848.  Six  years  later  she  founded 
the  New  York  Infirmary,  the  first  adequate  woman's  medical 
institution.  The  ministry  was  not  entirely  a  new  calling  for 
women,  for  certain  sects  such  as  the  Quakers  and  the  Shakers 
had  always  permitted  women  preachers;  but  the  first  regu 
larly  ordained  woman  in  the  United  States  was  Mrs.  Antoi 
nette  Brown  Blackwell  of  the  Congregational  Church,  who 
began  her  life  work  in  1852.  Women  were  as  yet  unknown 
in  the  legal  profession;  but  in  the  literary  field  they  were 
more  at  home.  Catherine  Sedgwick,  the  novelist,  Alice  and 
Phoebe  Cary,  the  poets,  and  Margaret  Fuller,  brilliant 
journalist  and  founder  of  the  Dial  magazine,  were  all  familiar 
household  names  in  the -middle  of  the  century. 

The  slavery  question  inevitably  overshadowed  all  other 
interests  of  the  time,  and  to  this  cause  public-spirited  women 
gave  their  chief  attention.  In  1852  Harriet  Beecher  Stowe 
published  her  great  propagandist  novel,  Uncle  Tom's  Cabin, 


I42  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

which  in  the  next  few  years  stirred  the  North  to  its  depths. 
Women  speakers  in  the  North  took  an  active  part  in  en 
kindling  public  indignation  over  the  Kansas-Nebraska  Act 
in  1854;  and  when  the  Republican  party  was  born  out  of 
the  intense  feeling  of  the  time,  women  stimulated  the  men 
to  active  participation  in  the  new  party.  Then  occurred  the 
Civil  War  and  the  energies  of  the  women  were  for  four 
terrible  years  turned  to  other  purposes. 

The  story  of  the  Civil  War  without  an  account  of  the 
part  borne  by  the  women  in  the  struggle  is  a  story  but  partly 
told  and  but  poorly  comprehended.  Women  became  a  part 
of  the  war  machine  quite  as  fully  as  the  men,  contributing 
services  almost  as  indispensable  to  national  success  as  the 
troops  in  the  field.  Organized  relief  work,  attempted  by 
the  women  of  Philadelphia  on  a  small  scale  during  the 
Revolutionary  War,  was  now  developed  to  a  high  degree  of 
perfection,  a  harbinger  of  what  the  women  of  America  were 
to  accomplish  through  even  abler  organization  in  the  World 
War.  A  few  days  after  the  surrender  of  Fort  Sumter  the 
leading  women  of  New  York  City  met  at  Cooper  Union 
and  under  the  inspiration  of  Dr.  Elizabeth  Blackwell  formed 
the  Woman's  Central  Relief  Association  of  New  York.  At 
the  solicitation  of  this  body  the  United  States  government 
was  shortly  thereafter  induced  to  authorize  the  establishment 
of  the  so-called  United  States  Sanitary  Commission,  charged 
with  the  duty  of  sustaining  the  morale  and  protecting  the 
health  of  men  in  the  camps,  and  of  aiding  in  the  care  of  the 
sick  and  wounded. 

The  work  of  this  organization,  the  counterpart  of  our 
modern  American  Red  Cross  (established  in  1882),  was 
made  possible  largely  through  the  exertions  of  the  women. 
In  nearly  every  community  of  the  North,  Soldiers'  Aid  So 
cieties  were  formed,  in  which  the  women  met  together, 
scraped  lint  and  rolled  bandages,  made  clothing  for  the 


ROLE  OF  WOMEN  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY     143 

soldiers,  and  collected  supplies  and  food  for  transmission  to 
the  nearest  depot  of  the  Sanitary  Commission.  The  Chicago 
branch  of  the  Sanitary  Commission  had  one  thousand  aid 
societies  constantly  sending  in  money  and  supplies ;  five  hun 
dred  societies  united  in  supporting  the  Cleveland  and  Cincin 
nati  branches.  A  suggestive  description  of  the  activities  of 
such  organizations  is  presented  by  the  final  report  of  the 
Wisconsin  Soldiers'  Aid  Society:  Six  thousand  packages 
were  dispatched;  gifts  amounting  to  $200,000  collected. 
Bureaus  were  organized  for  getting  state  pay  for  the  families 
of  soldiers,  for  securing  pensions  and  arrears,  for  obtaining 
employment  for  the  wives  and  mothers  of  volunteers,  for 
securing  work  for  men  partially  disabled  in  the  war,  and  for 
supplying  the  wants  of  those  who  had  been  permanently 
crippled  in  the  service. 

Perhaps  no  feature  of  the  war  was  more  remarkable  than 
the  series  of  Sanitary  Fairs  held  in  the  large  cities  of  the 
North  in  the  final  years  of  the  war.  Probably  more  than 
seven  million  dollars  had  been  laboriously  raised  by  the  Sani 
tary  Commission  by  a  variety  of  means  prior  to  Gettysburg. 
Shortly  thereafter  the  first  Sanitary  Fair  was  launched  in 
Chicago  under  the  directing  genius  of  Mrs.  Jane  Hoge  and 
Mrs.  Mary  A.  Livermore  with  the  idea  of  raising  $25,000. 
To  the  amazement  of  many  who  regarded  the  project  as 
quixotic,  more  than  $80,000  was  realized.  Other  cities  imi 
tated  and  improved  upon  the  example  of  Chicago,  and  not 
less  than  ten  million  dollars  was  contributed  to  the  support 
of  the  Sanitary  Commission  by  means  of  the  fairs. 

To  supplement  the  labors  of  the  Sanitary  Commission,  the 
Christian  Commission  was  established  in  November,  1861, 
primarily  as  an  enterprise  for  carrying  on  evangelical  work 
among  the  soldiers.  This  organization  was  also  largely 
sustained  by  the  women,  its  most  unique  service  being  the 
establishment  of  a  system  of  diet  kitchens  for  injured  soldiers 


144  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

which  extended  to  every  corps  of  the  army.  In  the  third 
year  of  the  war  a  special  Ladies'  Christian  Commission  was 
organized,  which  by  1865  possessed  two  hundred  and  sixty- 
five  branches  in  all  parts  of  the  North,  mostly  connected 
with  evangelical  churches.  During  the  latter  part  of  the 
war  Soldiers'  Homes  and  Soldiers'  Rests  were  established 
by  the  women  at  all  important  railroad  junctions,  where  the 
wants  of  traveling  and  wounded  soldiers  might  be  cared  for. 
Thousands  of  women,  distinguished  by  such  heroines  as 
Clara  Barton,  went  to  the  front  as  nurses,  enduring  the  hard 
ships  and  horrors  of  camp  life  and  battlefield  with  the  men. 
Many  women  assumed  masculine  garb  and  served  in  the 
army.  Of  a  different  character  though  not  less  important 
were  the  services  of  the  women  on  the  western  prairies,  who 
when  the  men  obeyed  the  nation's  call  took  up  the  work  of 
farming  and  helped  to  maintain  agricultural  production  at  a 
high  degree  of  efficiency. 

Speaking  of  the  work  of  the  women  during  the  war, 
Lincoln  said:  "I  have  never  studied  the  art  of  paying  com 
pliments  to  women ;  but  I  must  say,  that  if  all  that  has  been 
said  by  orators  and  poets  since  the  creation  of  the  world  were 
applied  to  the  women  of  America,  it  would  not  do  them 
justice  for  their  conduct  during  this  war." 

In  the  South  the  burdens  borne  by  the  women  were  even 
heavier.  A  larger  proportion  of  the  white  men  were  in  the 
army  and  the  responsibility  of  the  women  was  correspond 
ingly  greater.  The  women  brought  into  use  old  spinning- 
wheels  and  looms  in  order  to  make  clothing  for  the  soldiers ; 
they  denied  themselves  meat  and  drink  that  it  might  be  sent 
to  the  army;  they  nursed  wounded  soldiers  and  worked  in 
munition  plants.  The  suggestion  publicly  made  by  one  of 
them  late  in  the  war  that  all  southern  women  cut  off  their 
hair  and  sell  it  to  Europe,  where  it  was  believed  it  might 
bring  $40,000,000,  failed  of  execution  only  because  it  was 


ROLE  OF  WOMEN  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY    145 

impossible  to  run  the  federal  blockade.  Living  in  an  invaded 
country,  they  experienced  the  horrors  of  war  all  about  them 
— homes  destroyed,  fields  devastated,  hostile  soldiers  on  every 
hand.  Yet  they  faltered  not;  and  when  their  cause  was 
crushed  on  the  battlefield,  they  welcomed  their  soldiers  home 
and,  under  conditions  of  bitter  deprivation  and  deep  humilia 
tion,  helped  their  husbands  and  sons  to  build  a  new  South. 
The  interest  of  leading  women  of  the  North  in  the  cause 
of  emancipation  suffered  no  cessation  in  the  midst  of  their 
war  duties.  Although  the  government  made  official  an 
nouncement  at  the  outset  that  the  war  was  being  waged  for 
preservation  of  the  Union,  these  women  insisted  that  it 
should  be  turned  into  a  war  for  freedom.  Several  months 
after  Lincoln's  election  Susan  B.  Anthony  and  Mrs.  Stanton 
in  company  with  some  of  the  old  time  abolitionists  sought 
to  hold  a  series  of  conventions  in  the  leading  cities  of  the 
North  to  arouse  public  opinion  to  the  pitch  of  demanding 
immediate  emancipation;  but  the  meetings  were  broken  up 
at  every  point.  The  fact  was  that  the  majority  of  north 
erners  were  not  at  this  time  enamoured  of  the  idea  of 
prosecuting  a  "nigger  war";  and  the  Lincoln  administra 
tion  was  deeply  convinced  of  the  necessity  of  avoiding  the 
issue  in  order  to  retain  the  allegiance  of  the  four  border  slave 
states  that  had  chosen  to  remain  in  the  Union.  The  Emanci 
pation  Proclamation  when  it  appeared  was  greeted  by  these 
women  with  only  partial  approval,  inasmuch  as  it  declared 
the  freedom  merely  of  such  slaves  as  were  yet  to  be  found 
in  unconquered  southern  territory.  A  nationwide  call  was 
sent  out  for  a  convention  of  women  to  meet  in  New  York 
for  the  purpose  of  taking  appropriate  action.  Delegates  from 
many  states  attended.  The  Woman's  National  Loyal  League 
was  formed ;  and  resolutions  were  adopted  urging  the  presi 
dent  to  emancipate  all  the  slaves  in  the  nation  and  declaring 
that :  "There  never  can  be  a  true  peace  in  this  Republic  until 


146  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

the  civil  and  political  rights  of  all  citizens  of  African  descent 
and  all  women  are  practically  established."  The  next  eight 
een  months  were  spent  in  rolling  up  a  mammoth  petition, 
signed  by  265,000  men  and  women,  urging  that  Congress 
take  effective  action  for  universal  emancipation  of  the 
negroes.  Charles  Sumner,  Horace  Greeley  and  other  public 
men  believed  that  the  activities  of  the  Loyal  League  were  a 
mighty  educational  factor  in  hastening  the  adoption  of  the 
thirteenth  amendment. 

During  the  war  all  active  campaigning  for  woman's  rights 
had  been  suspended  despite  the  protests  of  Susan  B.  Anthony. 
The  suffrage  leaders  in  the  women's  war  work  believed  that 
wrhen  with  the  return  of  peace  justice  was  bestowed  upon 
the  enslaved  negro  the  grateful  government  would  also  re 
ward  the  women  with  a  gift  of  equal  rights.  They  were 
amazed  and  incensed  therefore  when  they  discovered  that 
the  reconstruction  statesmen  were  determined  to  ignore  their 
claims.  The  fourteenth  amendment,  proposed  in  Congress 
in  1866,  provided  in  its  second  section  for  a  reduction  of 
the  representation  of  such  states  as  withheld  the  ballot  from 
male  citizens  of  voting  age.  Thereby  the  word  "male"  was 
to  be  placed  in  the  federal  Constitution  for  the  first  time; 
the  intent  of  the  amendment  was  to  extend  federal  pro 
tection  to  male  suffrage,  leaving  woman  suffrage  as  hereto 
fore  to  the  mercy  of  the  states.  The  women  openly  and 
repeatedly  expressed  their  amazement  that  Congress  should 
be  willing  to  experiment  with  two  million  illiterate  black  men 
as  voters  while  denying  the  ballot  to  women.  They  charged 
that  the  Republicans  were  not  interested  in  establishing 
abstract  justice  as  they  professed  but  in  building  up  a  black 
Republican  party  in  the  South.  In  1866  the  American  Equal 
Rights  Society  was  formed  through  a  merger  of  the  former 
Woman  Rights  Society  with  a  part  of  the  old  American 
Anti-Slavery  Society ;  and  through  this  agency  Congress  was 


ROLE  OF  WOMEN  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY     147 

flooded  with  petitions  against  the  proposed  amendment. 
Their  protest  was  unavailing;  and  the  cup  of  their  humilia 
tion  was  filled  to  the  overflowing  when  an  additional  fif 
teenth  amendment  was  passed  by  Congress  prohibiting  any 
abridgment  of  the  right  to  vote  "on  account  of  race,  color, 
or  previous  condition  of  servitude."  With  the  addition  of 
the  word  "sex"  to  the  foregoing  list,  the  suffrage  leaders 
would  have  given  their  unqualified  support  to  the  amendment. 
The  protagonists  of  woman  rights  now  sought  to  turn  defeat 
into  victory  by  claiming  that  the  fourteenth  amendment, 
in  declaring  that  all  persons  born  or  naturalized  in  the  United 
States  were  citizens,  had  thereby  really  enfranchised  all 
women.  Acting  upon  this  interpretation  women  actually 
attempted  to  vote  in  several  states  and  in  some  cases  suc 
ceeded  ;  and  it  was  not  until  a  Supreme  Court  decision  was 
rendered  upon  the  point  in  1875  that  the  women  were  con 
vinced  that  the  right  of  citizenship  did  not  carry  with  it  the 
right  to  vote. 

But  the  woman  suffragists  did  not  confine  their  efforts 
to  Congress  in  the  reconstruction  period.  In  1867  they 
presented  their  case  to  a  state  constitutional  convention  for 
the  first  time  in  history,  that  of  New  York,  and  fought  a 
vigorous  campaign  to  amend  the  constitution  of  Kansas. 
Their  only  success  came  two  years  later  when  in  the  far-off 
West  the  territory  of  Wyoming  was  organized  on  the  basis 
of  equal  political  rights  for  men  and  women.  The  same 
year  the  women  began  to  re-form  their  ranks  in  preparation 
for  the  long  struggle  that  lay  ahead  of  them.  The  American 
Woman  Suffrage  Association  was  organized  by  suffragists 
who  believed  in  centering  their  efforts  upon  the  state  legis 
latures;  and  the  next  year  the  National  Woman  Suffrage 
Association  succeeded  the  Equal  Rights  Society,  pledged  to 
the  policy  of  concentrating  suffrage  efforts  upon  the  national 
government.  These  two  organizations,  divided  as  to  tactics 


148  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

but  agreeing  fundamentally  in  purpose,  remained  apart  for 
more  than  twenty  years  and  involved  a  useless  division  of 
forces.  Thus  Jhe  period  of  reconstruction,  which  had 
seemed  so  full  of  hope  for  the  woman's  cause,  closed  with 
no  substantial  advances  for  the  sex.  The  most  promising 
opportunity  which  had  yet  come  to  them  passed  quickly  into 
history  and  was  soon  forgotten  by  the  nation  in  the  throng 
ing  of  other  interests. 

IV 

The  half -century  from  1870  to  1920  was  destined  to  wit 
ness  the  triumph  of  the  principle  of  sex  equality.  New 
elements,  materialistic  and  spiritual,  entered  into  the  situa 
tion  which  made  inevitable  at  the  end  of  the  period  what  was 
scarcely  thinkable  at  its  beginning.  Chief  among  these  new 
factors  was  the  great  physical  revolution  in  the  woman's 
world  which  drove  an  unprecedented  number  of  women  into 
industry  and  trade;  but,  as  we  shall  see,  there  were  also 
other  influences  at  work  which  were  making  for  their  intel 
lectual  and  social  advance  and  for  their  enlarged  influence  in 
government  and  society. 

The  Civil  War  was  followed  by  an  era  of  rapid  industrial 
development  without  equal  in  American  history.  The  phe 
nomenal  demand  for  wage  labor  could  be  satisfied  only  by 
drawing  into  the  factories  great  armies  of  women  and  chil 
dren  where  they  worked  under  precisely  the  same  conditions 
as  did  the  men.  Already  by  1870  one-seventh  of  the  women 
over  sixteen  years  of  age  were  engaged  in  gainful  pursuits ; 
and  three  decades  later  the  proportion  had  increased  to  more 
than  one-fifth.  For  hundreds  of  thousands  of  women, 
married  and  single,  it  thus  happened  that  outside  interests 
relegated  the  home  to  a  secondary  place,  not  because  the 
women  were  discontented  and  insurgent  but  because  modern 
conditions  of  industry  had  forced  them  out  of  their  tradi- 


ROLE  OF  WOMEN  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY    149 

tional  sphere.  Wage-earning  women  were  compelled  in  self- 
protection  to  take  an  interest  in  far-reaching  questions  of 
governmental  and  industrial  policy  affecting  their  welfare. 
In  the  seventies  and  eighties  they  began  to  enter  the  trade 
union  movement ;  others  became  zealous  workers  in  the 
growing  Socialist  movement.  The  existence  of  this  great 
class  of  wage-earning  women  gave  fresh  point  to  all  the 
arguments  for  sex  equality;  and  out  of  their  ranks  came 
many  hearty  workers  for  the  elimination  of  sex  barriers. 

With  the  widening  of  the  industrial  sphere  new  oppor 
tunities  of  higher  education  began  to  open  up  to  women,  and 
educated  women  began  to  find  new  outlets  for  their  energies 
and  creative  power.  In  1865  the  first  women's  college 
possessing  ample  funds  was  founded  at  Poughkeepsie,  New 
York,  by  Matthew  Vassar,  whose  ideal  it  was  to  maintain 
educational  standards  as  exacting  as  those  prevailing  in  the 
best  men's  colleges.  The  establishment  of  Vassar  College 
cast  a  glamour  of  respectability  about  all  subsequent  enter 
prises  for  the  higher  instruction  of  women.  The  western 
state  universities  began  to  fall  in  with  the  movement.  Under 
a  law  of  1867  Wisconsin  admitted  women  to  the  normal 
department  of  the  university ;  and  three  years  later  Michigan 
reversed  the  practice  of  almost  thirty  years  by  opening  all 
the  regular  courses  to  women.  The  movement,  so  diffidently 
begun,  gathered  momentum  until  in  1920  more  than  one 
hundred  institutions  of  higher  learning  devoted  their  entire 
time  to  women  students,  and  about  three  hundred  and  fifty 
colleges  and  universities  were  classed  as  co-educational. 

On  the  whole  it  proved  easier  for  women  to  establish  their 
rights  to  a  liberal  education  than  to  gain  admission  to  the 
professional  and  technical  courses.  Notwithstanding  the 
hopeful  beginnings  made  in  the  period  before  the  Civil  War, 
women  were  for  many  years  excluded  from  the  best  schools 
of  medicine,  law  and  theology.  One  of  the  leading  medical 


150  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

schools,  Johns  Hopkins,  opened  its  doors  to  them  in  1893; 
but  when  the  medical  schools  of  Columbia  and  Yale  took 
similar  action  in  1916,  there  still  remained  twenty-eight 
medical  colleges  closed  to  women,  among  them  the  medical 
departments  of  seven  state  universities.  Law  schools,  other 
than  those  connected  with  the  state  universities,  have  been 
even  slower  to  admit  women.  But  in  spite  of  all  discrimina 
tions  and  discouragements,  women  forged  ahead  in  the  pro 
fessions.  Although  the  first  woman  lawyer  was  admitted 
to  the  bar  as  late  as  1869,  there  were  more  than  one  thousand 
women  lawyers  in  the  United  States  in  1910.  At  the  same 
time  there  were  more  than  seven  thousand  women  doctors, 
three  thousand  five  hundred  women  preachers,  two  thousand 
women  journalists,  besides  great  numbers  in  teaching,  com 
merce,  the  civil  service,  and  other  pursuits.  To  women  of 
this  class  the  arguments  for  the  equalization  of  sex  oppor 
tunities  seemed  axiomatic  and  they  instinctively  aligned  them 
selves  with  Susan  B.  Anthony  and  Elizabeth  Cady  Stan  ton 
in  the  woman  movement.  Many  individuals  among  them 
possessed  organizing  ability  of  a  high  order  and  the  gift  of 
eloquence ;  and  to  them,  as  we  shall  see,  fell  the  responsibility 
as  well  as  the  credit  of  leading  the  suffrage  cause  to  its 
final  triumph. 

Another  factor  working  in  the  interests  of  feminine  eman 
cipation  was  the  rise  and  development  of  women's  clubs 
throughout  the  United  States.  The  pioneers  of  the  move 
ment  were  the  New  England  Woman's  Club  at  Boston  and 
the  Sorosis  at  New  York,  both  founded  in  1868.  The  latter 
grew  out  of  the  discourteous  treatment  accorded  to  the 
women  by  the  Press  Club  of  New  York  on  the  occasion  of 
the  Dickens  dinner.  At  first  such  clubs  were  few  in  number 
and  purely  literary  or  social  in  purpose,  but  the  number  of 
clubs  increased  as  domestic  conveniences  became  more  com 
mon  and  the  housewife  gained  more  time  from  domestic 


ROLE  OF  WOMEN  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY    151 

duties.  By  1890  the  clubs  were  so  numerous  and  so  wide 
spread  that  they  became  federated  in  a  great  national  system ; 
and  the  units  began  to  communicate  with  each  other  and 
receive  new  ideas  and  inspiration.  As  time  went  on,  the 
women  paid  less  attention  to  art  and  literature  and  more  to 
civic  and  social  problems,  for  they  had  come  to  realize  that 
under  modern  conditions  the  "home"  is  not  bounded  by  four 
walls  but  is  directly  affected  by  all  the  good  and  evil  influ 
ences  of  the  community  and  of  the  state  and  nation.  Thus 
they  became  interested  in  such  problems  as  child  welfare, 
education,  food  adulteration  and  inevitably  in  the  suffrage 
question.  The  General  Federation  of  Women's  Clubs  repre 
sented  a  total  membership  of  nearly  one  million  women  in 
1910.  The  typical  woman's  club  never  became  a  center  for 
strenuous  suffrage  agitation;  but  it  was  a  means  of  educating 
many  housewives  to  the  significance  of  the  demand  and  the 
lessons  in  organization  that  were  learned  served  them  in  good 
stead  in  the  battle  for  the  ballot. 

The  great  enterprises  of  moral  reform  in  the  period  since 
the  Civil  War  were  led  and  supported,  in  very  large  part,  by 
women.  The  close  connection  between  women  and  the  tem 
perance  cause  was  recognized  in  a  unique  way  when  the 
Prohibition  party  at  its  initial  national  convention  in  1872 
declared  for  equal  suffrage,  thus  anticipating  the  major 
parties  by  forty-four  years.  In  December  of  the  following 
year  began  the  remarkable  Women's  Temperance  Crusade 
of  1873-1874,  inspired  by  a  temperance  address  delivered  by 
Dr.  Dio  Lewis  of  Boston  at  Hillsboro,  Ohio.  The  women 
of  the  town  gathered  in  the  streets  to  pray  and  entered 
saloons,  two  by  two,  and  exhorted  the  bartenders  and 
drinkers  to  cease  their  evil  ways.  The  movement  spread  in 
every  direction.  In  fifty  days  it  swept  the  liquor  traffic  out 
of  two  hundred  and  fifty  towns.  But  this  exorcism  was  not 
lasting  of  effect;  the  saloon  was  found  to  be  the  outcropping 


152  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

of  the  liquor  system  entrenched  in  law  and  possessing  rami 
fications  in  government  and  business.  The  women  therefore 
saw  need  for  revising  their  tactics,  and  in  November,  1874, 
the  Woman's  Christian  Temperance  Union  was  founded. 
Under  the  guidance  of  Frances  Willard  this  organization 
waxed  strong,  establishing  branches  in  every  state  and 
territory  and  attaining  the  distinction  of  being  the  largest 
society  composed  exclusively  of  women  and  conducted 
entirely  by  them.  The  educational  and  political  activities  of 
the  W.  C.  T.  U.  were  a  potent  influence  in  preparing  the 
public  mind  for  the  adoption  of  the  federal  prohibition 
amendment  in  1919. 

To  women  also  must  be  given  much  of  the  credjt  for  the 
rise  and  spread  of  the  social  welfare  movement  along  scien 
tific  lines.  One  of  the  earliest  and  most  successful  settlement 
houses  in  America  was  Hull  House,  founded  in  Chicago  by 
Jane  Addams  and  Ellen  G.  Starr  in  1889.  The  College 
Settlement  Association  of  New  York  originated  in  1887 
among  the  students  of  Smith  College.  The  playground 
movement  and  the  development  of  agencies  for  scientific 
philanthropy  also  owe  much  to  the  initiative  and  continued 
support  of  women.  The  names  of  women  workers  in  social 
service  have  been  legion;  the  value  of  their  labors  beyond 
computation. 

The  entrance  of  great  numbers  of  women  into  all  fields  of 
human  activity  made  the  ancient  legal  fetters  of  the  sex  an 
intolerable  anachronism.  Their  enhanced  influence  in  the 
world  of  affairs  led  inevitably  to  the  removal  of  the  worst 
discriminations.  By  the  beginning  of  the  twentieth  century 
legislative  enactments  had  gone  far  toward  introducing  the 
principle  of  sex  equality  into  American  law.  Married 
women  might  own  and  control  their  separate  property  in 
three- fourths  of  the  states ;  in  every  state  a  wife  might  dis 
pose  by  will  of  her  separate  property.  In  about  two-thirds 


ROLE  OF  WOMEN  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY     153 

of  the  states  she  was  entitled  to  her  own  earnings;  and  in 
the  large  majority  she  might  make  contracts  and  bring  suit. 
In  many  states  the  law  provided  that  if  the  wife  earned 
money  outside  the  home  the  fruits  of  her  labors  were  her 
own,  but  all  her  earnings  within  the  household  still  belonged 
to  the  husband.  Fathers  and  mothers  possessed  equal  guar 
dianship  of  children  only  in  nine  states  and  in  the  District 
of  Columbia.  Many  inequalities  in  civil  status  remained; 
but  the  right  of  sex  equality  was  no  longer  seriously  ques 
tioned,  and  time  alone  was  required  to  assure  to  woman  her 
full  position  in  the  eyes  of  the  law. 

The  expansion  of  woman's  sphere  in  so  many  directions 
was  accompanied  by  steady  advances  toward  the  cherished 
goal  of  equal  political  rights.  The  suffrage  movement  of  the 
forties  and  fifties  had  possessed  able  heads  but  had  lacked 
body ;  but  with  the  exodus  of  great  numbers  of  women  from 
the  home  in  the  years  following  1870,  the  movement  con 
tinued  to  develop  leaders  and  slowly  gained  a  mass  of 
followers  among  both  men  and  women  which  spelt  eventual 
success.  It  is  true  that  the  time  never  came  when  all  women 
were  convinced  of  the  righteousness  of  the  suffrage  cause. 
Many  of  them  had  continued  to  live  sheltered  lives  and  knew 
little  of  the  dynamic  changes  that  had  transformed  the  life 
of  their  sex ;  others  felt  that  the  problems  of  democracy  were 
already  sufficiently  baffling  without  increasing  the  numbers 
of  the  electorate.  In  1873  a  committee  of  women  protested 
to  Congress  against  the  proposal  to  grant  equal  suffrage; 
and  some  years  later  a  National  Association  Opposed  to  the 
Extension  of  Woman  Suffrage,  composed  of  women,  was 
formed. 

The  progress  toward  full  equal  suffrage  was  gradual  but 
certain.  In  the  early  years  following  the  Civil  War  some  of 
the  western  states  ventured  to  adopt  the  principle  of  woman 
suffrage  in  a  local  and  limited  sense.  Kansas  granted  the 


154  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

vote  to  women  in  school  elections  in  1861 ;  Michigan  and 
Minnesota  followed  in  1875,  and  thereafter  numerous  other 
states  emulated  their  example.  In  some  states  women  were 
permitted  to  vote  in  local  elections  involving  bond  issues  or 
taxation  questions.  Complete  equality  in  voting  was  not 
granted  by  any  state  until  the  territory  of  Wyoming  was 
admitted  into  the  Union  in  1890.  Three  other  far  western 
states  followed  by  1896;  and  then  there  came  a  lull  of  four 
teen  years  during  which  no  further  advances  were  made 
toward  complete  equal  suffrage. 

While  suffrage  campaigns  were  being  fought  in  the  various 
states,  renewed  effort  was  being  made  to  secure  affirmative 
action  from  the  federal  government.  One  wing  of  the 
suffrage  leaders  was  convinced  that  the  swiftest  road  to 
success  lay  in  an  amendment  to  the  federal  Constitution. 
Beginning  with  1870  they  argued  each  year  before  Congres 
sional  committees  for  an  equal  suffrage  amendment.  Peti 
tions  by  the  thousands  were  poured  into  Congress.  Finally 
in  1878,  Senator  A.  A.  Sargent  of  California  introduced  the 
amendment  for  action  by  Congress.  The  phraseology  of 
Sargent's  amendment  is  historic,  for  the  language  was  framed 
by  Susan  B.  Anthony  and  forty-two  years  later  was  em 
bodied  as  the  nineteenth  amendment  in  the  United  States 
Constitution.  The  zeal  of  the  women  had  other  results  as 
well.  Between  1878  and  1896  committees  of  the  Senate 
reported  five  times  in  favor  of  a  suffrage  amendment  and 
House  committees  twice;  but  action  went  no  further. 
Thereafter  Susan  B.  Anthony  ceased  spending  her  winters 
in  Washington  and  Congress  ceased  to  concern  itself  with 
the  matter  until  the  suffrage  movement  entered  a  new  era 
about  1910. 

The  situation  of  affairs  at  Washington  clearly  demon 
strated  that  Congress  was  not  disposed  to  give  serious  con 
sideration  to  the  demands  of  the  women  until  a  larger 
number  of  individual  Congressmen  owed  their  seats  to  the 


ROLE  OF  WOMEN  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY     155 

favor  of  women  voters.  The  efforts  of  the  years  following 
1896  were  thrown  very  largely  into  state  campaigns  though 
uniformly  without  success.  Finally  in  1910  a  new  spirit  of 
progressivism  began  to  make  itself  felt  throughout  the  land, 
creating  schism  within  the  Republican  party  and  exciting 
wide  public  interest  in  legislation  for  social  justice.  Taking 
advantage  of  the  new  spirit  of  the  times,  suffrage  leaders 
redoubled  their  efforts.  The  National  American  Woman 
Suffrage  Association,  led  by  Mrs.  Carrie  Chapman  Catt, 
set  to  work  with  renewed  determination.  At  the  national 
capital  a  group  of  women  under  the  leadership  of  Alice  Paul 
formed  the  Congressional  Union  in  1913,  resolved  to  bring 
the  federal  government  to  terms  through  the  use  of  sensa 
tional  and  militant  methods.  Results  began  to  appear. 
Again  it  was  the  trans-Mississippi  West  that  pointed  the 
way;  and  before  New  York  acted  in  1917,  twelve  states  of 
that  section  had  accepted  women  on  equal  political  terms  with 
men.  A  number  of  state  legislatures  finding  constitutional 
barriers  in  the  way  of  full  enfranchisement  followed  the 
example  of  Illinois  (1913)  by  granting  the  vote  to  women 
in  presidential  elections  only. 

As  the  number  of  equal  suffrage  states  increased,  the 
coercive  effect  of  the  vast  body  of  new  voters  upon  Congress 
became  apparent.  In  the  Senate  of  1913  eighteen  members 
had  woman  constituents.  Irrespective  of  the  merits  of  the 
question,  party  leaders  could  now  foresee  the  outcome  and 
they  resolved  to  reap  such  partisan  advantages  as  they  might 
from  their  advocacy  of  the  federal  franchise  for  women. 
Hardly  a  year  passed  after  1913  without  a  vote  being  taken 
on  the  submission  of  a  constitutional  amendment,  either  in 
one  or  both  houses  of  Congress.  Finally  in  1919,  under  the 
spur  of  a  special  message  from  President  Wilson,  the  neces 
sary  two-thirds  majority  was  obtained ;  and  the  states  ratified 
the  new  amendment  in  time  for  the  women  to  take  part  in 
the  approaching  presidential  election. 


156  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


The  entrance  of  the  United  States  into  the  World  War 
in  1917  undoubtedly  hastened  the  adoption  of  federal  suf 
frage  for  women  because  of  the  indispensable  part  which 
the  women  of  America  played  in  making  the  war  a  success 
for  the  Allies.  A  few  days  after  the  declaration  of  war  the 
National  Woman's  Committee  was  created  by  the  Council 
of  National  Defense,  with  Dr.  Anna  Howard  Shaw  as  Presi 
dent,  and  charged  with  the  duty  of  coordinating  the  patriotic 
activities  of  the  women  of  the  nation.  Branches  of  the 
national  body  were  organized  in  every  state  and  the  state 
committees  undertook  to  set  up  Woman's  Committees  in 
every  county  and  city. 

Under  the  supervision  of  these  central  committees  the 
war  work  of  the  women  attained  a  degree  of  efficiency  un 
rivalled  in  the  history  of  the  world.  No  city  or  hamlet  was 
without  its  circle  of  devoted  women  gathering  daily  or  weekly 
under  the  auspices  of  the  American  Red  Cross  to  roll  band 
ages,  make  clothing,  or  prepare  special  foods  for  the  soldiers. 
One  department  of  the  Red  Cross  was  concerned  exclusively 
with  looking  after  the  interests  of  families  and  relatives  left 
dependent  by  the  enlistment  of  the  breadwinners  in  the  army 
or  navy.  Women  flocked  into  the  civil  service  in  order  to 
enable  the  government  to  carry  on  its  greatly  expanded 
functions ;  they  assisted  actively  in  the  flotation  of  the  vari 
ous  Liberty  Loans;  they  worked  in  munition  factories  and 
other  essential  industries,  thus  releasing  men  for  active  field 
service.  They  undertook  protective  work  for  girls  in  the 
neighborhood  of  the  great  army  encampments  and  raised 
money  for  building  dormitories  and  "community  houses" 
where  civilian  friends  and  relatives  of  the  soldiers  might  be 
accommodated.  Thousands  of  women  went  abroad  with  the 
Expeditionary  Forces,  serving  in  a  great  variety  of  capacities 


ROLE  OF  WOMEN  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY    157 

from  Red  Cross  nurses  and  Salvation  Army  workers  to  office 
clerks  and  Y.  M.  C.  A.  entertainers.  In  the  maintenance  of 
the  morale  of  the  troops  perhaps  no  single  factor  was  of 
more  importance  than  the  unswerving  patriotism  of  the 
women. 

Without  any  disparagement  of  the  high  importance  of 
such  services,  it  is  probably  true  that  the  greatest  contribution 
of  the  women  to  victory  was  made  in  an  altogether  different 
field,  that  of  food  conservation.  From  the  outset  the  govern 
ment  recognized  the  supreme  need  of  carrying  food  to  the 
armies  and  exhausted  populations  of  the  Allied  countries. 
The  housewives  of  the  nation  rallied  promptly  to  the  call 
of  the  Food  Administrator  to  conserve  food  and  increase  the 
local  food  supplies.  Few  homes  were  without  "pledge- 
cards"  in  the  windows;  and  few  were  the  homes  in  which 
"wheatless  days"  and  "meatless  meals"  were  not  as_  con 
scientiously  observed  as  if  prescribed  by  law.  Women  were 
also  active  in  planting  "war  gardens,"  and  the  Woman's  Land 
Army  of  America  played  no  inconsiderable  part  in  supplying 
woman  farm  labor. 

No  more  fitting  tribute  has  been  accorded  the  war  work 
of  our  women  than  that  paid  by  Sir  George  Paish  in  a 
public  address  in  London  in  April,  1920:  "When  I  hear 
people  say  that  America  won  the  war,  I  assent.  I  go  farther. 
I  say  that  the  war  was  won  by  the  women  of  America. 
In  the  years  of  food  shortage  it  was  the  American  women 
who  made  it  possible  for  us  to  have  enough  food  to  go  round. 
American  women  ate  maize  that  we  might  eat  wheat." 

Women  are  today  standing  upon  the  threshold  of  a  new 
era  in  the  history  of  their  sex;  and  whatever  affects  the 
status  of  woman  in  America  will  affect  the  entire  people 
of  which  they  are  so  intimately  a  part.  Women  in  the 
United  States  are  now,  in  most  respects,  a  part  of  human 
society  literally  and  directly,  not  merely  as  represented  by 


158  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

men  to  whom  they  "belong"  in  some  relation.  They  are 
directly  responsible  for  their  choices  and  decisions  and  are 
placed  in  a  position  to  increase  immeasurably  their  contri 
butions  to  American  development.  In  speculating  as  to  the 
use  that  women  will  make  of  the  vote,  it  is  not  to  be  over 
looked  that  the  women  are  better  prepared  for  their  new 
responsibilities  than  any  previous  class  admitted  to  the  fran 
chise.  The  beneficiaries  of  white  manhood  suffrage  in 
Jackson's  day  were  undisciplined  and  uneducated ;  and  the 
black  men,  enfranchised  a  generation  later,  were  on  an  infi 
nitely  lower  plane  of  public  morality  and  individual  fitness. 
The  value  of  the  ballot  to  the  women  themselves  as  an 
educative  force  cannot  be  doubted;  and  any  knowhdge  of 
the  past  services  of  women  to  American  history  is  an  assur 
ance  that  the  women  will  use  their  new  power  for  the  good 
of  the  nation  and  of  humanity. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Historians  have  generally  ignored  woman  as  a  positive  influence 
in  American  history  and  have  usually  omitted  even  any  mention  of 
her  struggle  for  sex  equality.  This  task  has  thus  fallen  to  other 
hands.  Belle  Squire  in  her  little  volume  entitled  The  Woman  Move 
ment  in  America  (Chicago,  1911)  was  the  first  writer  to  attempt  to 
set  forth  the  part  that  women  as  a  class  have  played  in  all  periods 
of  American  history.  The  volume  was  originally  written  as  a  series 
of  articles  for  newspaper  use  and  was  based  very  largely  upon  The 
History  of  Woman  Suffrage  by  Elizabeth  Cady  Stanton  and  others, 
mentioned  hereinafter.  In  the  next  year  H.  Addington  Bruce  pub 
lished  his  book  Woman  in  the  Making  of  America  (Boston,  1912), 
which  attempted  to  accomplish  the  same  purpose  but  with  less 
success.  Since  the  appearance  of  these  books,  little  has  been  done 
toward  making  further  applications  of  the  point  of  view ;  and  the 
only  history  school  book  which  has  availed  itself  of  this  approach 
to  the  subject  is  Charles  A.  Beard  and  William  C.  Bagley's  The 
History  of  the  American  People  (New  York,  1918).  It  is  unthink 
able  that  this  neglect  should  continue  in  the  new  era  of  historical 
writing  ushered  in  by  the  adoption  of  the  nineteenth  amendment. 

For  a  Ipng  period  of  years  appreciative  studies  have  been  made 
by  writers  interested  in  the  influence  of  women  in  special  periods 
of  American  history.  Some  of  the  more  important  of  these  special 
studies  are  the  following :  Alice  Morse  Earle's  Colonial  Dames  and 


ROLE  OF  WOMEN  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY     159 

Housewives  (Boston,  1895)  ;  Sydney  George  Fisher's  Men,  Women 
and  Manners  in  Colonial  Times  (2  v. ;  Philadelphia,  1898);  Harry 
Clinton  Green  and  Mary  Wolcott  Green's  The  Pioneer  Mothers  of 
America  (3  v. ;  New  York,  1912)  ;  Elizabeth  F.  Ellet's  The  Women 
of  the  American  Revolution  (4th  ed.,  New  York,  1849)  ;  Gaillard 
Hunt's  Life  in  America  One  Hundred  Years  Ago  (New  York, 
1914),  chap,  x;  Elizabeth  F.  Ellet's  The  Pioneer  Women  of  the 
West  (New  York,  1852)  ;  L.  P.  Brockett  and  M.  C.  Vaughan's 
Woman's  Work  in  the  Civil  War  (Philadelphia,  1867)  ;  Frank 
Moore's  Women  of  the  War  (Hartford,  1866)  ;  Mary  Forrest's 
Women  of  the  South  (New  York,  1865)  ;  John  L.  Underwood's  The 
Women  of  the  Confederacy  (New  York,  1906). 

The  great  arsenal  of  facts  pertaining  to  the  woman  rights  move 
ment  in  America  prior  to  1902  is  the  monumental  work  entitled  The 
History  of  Woman  Suffrage  (4  v. ;  2d  ed.,  Rochester,  1889-1902)  by 
Elizabeth  Cady  Stanton,  Susan  B.  Anthony,  Matilda  Joslyn  Gage 
and  others.  All  subsequent  writers  have  made  generous  use  of  the 
materials  brought  together  in  these  volumes.  Since  1902  many 
valuable  studies  have  been  made  of  special  aspects  of  woman's  life 
and  activities  in  the  United  States,  among  which  may  be  mentioned 
Edith  Abbott's  Women  in  Industry  (New  York,  1910)  ;  Arthur  W. 
Calhoun's  Social  History  of  the  American  Family  from  Colonial 
Times  to  the  Present  (3  v. ;  Cleveland,  1917-1919)  ;  E.  A.  Hecker's 
Short  History  of  Women's  Rights  (New  York,  1911)  ;  Bertha  A. 
Rembaugh's  The  Political  Status  of  Women  in  the  United  States 
(New  York,  1911)  ;  J.  M.  Taylor's  Before  Vassar  Opened  (Boston, 
1914)  ;  Jennie  Lansley  Wilson's  The  Legal  and  Political  Status  of 
Women  in  the  United  States  (Cedar  Rapids,  1912)  ;  Mary  I.  Wood's 
The  History  of  the  General  Federation  of  Women's  Clubs  (New 
York,  1912).  Of  considerable  value  also  is  Mrs.  J.  C.  Croly's  The' 
History  of  the  Woman's  Club  Movement  in  America  (New  York, 
1808). 

In  dealing  with  women  in  American  history  the  biographical 
approach  has  been  most  popular.  As  examples  of  this  type  of  litera 
ture  the  following  books  may  be  cited :  Elmer  C.  Adams  and 
Warren  D.  Foster's  Heroines  of  Modern  Progress  (New  York, 
!9i3)  J  Gamaliel  Bradford's  Portraits  of  American  Women  (Bos 
ton,  1919)  ;  Grace  Humphreys's  Women  in  American  History 
(Indianapolis,  1919)  ;  Mary  R.  Parkman's  Heroines  of  Service  (New 
York,  1917)  ;  Virginia  Tatnall  Peacock's  Famous  American  Belles 
of  the  Nineteenth  Century  (Philadelphia,  1901)  ;  Kate  D.  Sweetser's 
Ten  American  Girls  from  History  (New  York,  1917)  ;  Lillian 
Whiting's  Women  Who  Have  Ennobled  Life  (Philadelphia,  1915). 
Excellent  biographies  have  also  appeared  of  individual  women,  such 
as  Susan  B.  Anthony,  Margaret  Fuller,  Clara  Barton,  Harriet 
Beecher  Stowe  and  Mary  A.  Livermore. 


CHAPTER  VII 

THE  AMERICAN    REVOLUTION 

When  the  representatives  of  George  V  rendered  homage 
a  few  years  ago  at  the  tomb  of  the  great  disloyalist  and  rebel 
of  a  former  century,  George  Washington,  the  minds  of  many 
Americans  reverted,  with  a  sense  of  bewilderment,  to  the 
times  when  another  King  George  was  guiding  the  destinies 
of  the  British  nation.  The  fact  is  that  the  average  American 
still  accepts  without  qualification  or  question  the  partisan 
justifications  of  the  struggle  for  independence  which  have 
come  down  from  the  actual  participants  in  the  affair  on  the 
American  side.  These  accounts,  colored  by  the  emotions 
and  misunderstandings  of  the  times  and  designed  to  arouse 
the  colonists  to  a  warlike  pitch  against  the  British  govern 
ment,  have  formed  the  basis  of  the  treatments  in  our  school 
textbooks  and  have  served  to  perpetuate  judgments  of  the 
American  Revolution  which  no  fair-minded  historian  can 
accept  today.  Indeed,  many  Americans  of  the  present 
generation  who  readily  admit  that  there  is  much  to  be  said 
for  the  southern  side  in  the  Civil  War  condemn  as  un 
patriotic  any  effort  to  consider  the  origins  of  the  War  for 
Independence  from  a  standpoint  of  scientific  historical 
detachment.  Fortunately  our  conception  of  patriotism  is 
undergoing  revision,  for  Germany  has  taught  us  the  danger 
of  teaching  propaganda  in  the  guise  of  history ;  and  the 
teacher  and  writer  of  history  today  is  charged  with  the 
responsibility  of  being  as  scrupulously  fair  to  other  nations 
as  to  the  United  States  in  dealing  with  the  subject  matter 
of  American  history. 

160 


THE  AMERICAN  REVOLUTION  161 

In  yet  another  way  the  popular  understanding  of  the  revo 
lutionary  movement  is  strangely  at  fault.  We  are  inclined 
to  think  of  the  Revolution  as  a  spontaneous  uprising  of  the 
whole  colonial  population  without  faction  or  disagreement 
among  them.  Nothing  could  be  farther  from  the  truth 
according  to  the  testimony  of  the  patriots  themselves. 
Thomas  Hutchinson,  the  royal  governor  of  Massachusetts, 
declared  to  a  committee  of  Parliament  in  1779  that  at  the 
outbreak  of  the  war  not  one-fifth  of  the  people  "had  inde 
pendence  in  view" ;  and  John  Adams,  who  would  scarcely 
be  inclined  to  understate  the  number  of  the  patriots,  gave 
his  opinion  that  about  one-third  of  the  people  were  opposed 
to  the  measures  of  the  Revolution  in  all  its  stages.  The 
great  problem  of  the  patriot  leaders,  Adams  admitted  in 
after  years,  was  to  keep  the  spirit  of  protest  and  revolt 
burning  with  equal  intensity  in  the  thirteen  colonies  or,  as 
he  said  more  crisply,  to  get  the  thirteen  clocks  to  strike  at 
the  same  time. 

Nor  was  the  American  Revolution  the  sedate  and  gentle 
manly  affair  that  the  popular  historians  have  pictured  it. 
Sydney  George  Fisher  is  amply  justified  in  charging  that 
since  the  people  who  write  histories  usually  belong  to  the 
class  who  take  the  side  of  government  in  a  revolution,  they 
"have  accordingly  tried  to  describe  a  revolution  in  which  all 
scholarly,  refined,  and  conservative  persons  might  have  un 
hesitatingly  taken  part."  The  fact  is  that  the  American 
Revolution,  as  we  now  know  it  to  have  been,  is  infinitely 
more  interesting  and  human,  and  provocative  of  patriotism, 
than  the  make-believe  revolution  handed  down  by  tradition. 


The  very  term  "American  Revolution"  is  not  without 
difficulties  and  its  use  has  led  to  misconception  and  con 
fusion.  In  letter  after  letter  John  Adams  tried  to  teach  a 


162  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

headstrong  generation  some  degree  of  accuracy  in  the  use 
of  an  expression  of  whose  meaning  they  had  knowledge  only 
by  hearsay.  "A  history  of  the  first  war  of  the  United 
'/  States  is  a  very  different  thing  from  a  history  of  the  Amer 
ican  Revolution,"  he  wrote  in  1815.  "...  The  revolution 

:  was  in  the  minds  of  the  people,  and  in  the  union  of  the 
—  colonies,  both  of  which  were  accomplished  before  hostilities 
commenced.  This  revolution  and  union  were  gradually 
forming  from  the  years  1760  to  1776."  And  to  another 
correspondent  he  wrote:  "But  what  do  we  mean  by  the 
American  Revolution?  Do  we  mean  the  American  war? 
The  Revolution  was  effected  before  the  war  commenced. 
The  Revolution  was  in  the  minds  and  hearts  of  the  people." 
This  distinction  is  not  only  valid  in  point  of  fact  but  it 
offers  a  helpful  avenue  of  approach  for  a  consideration  of 
the  circumstances  of  the  nation's  birth.  If  the  period  from 
1760  to  1776  is  not  viewed  merely  as  the  prelude  to  the 
American  Revolution,  the  military  struggle  may  frankly  be 

"regarded  for  what  it  actually  was,  namely  a  war  to  dis 
member  the  British  empire,  an  armed  attempt  to  impose  the 
views  of  the  revolutionists  upon  the  British  government  and 
a  large  section  of  the  colonial  population  at  whatever  cost  to 
freedom  of  opinion  or  the  sanctity  of  life  and  property. 
The  major  emphasis  is  thus  placed  upon  the  clashing  of  eco 
nomic  interests  and  the  interplay  of  mutual  prejudices,  oppos 
ing  ideals  and  personal  antagonisms — whether  in  England  or 
America — which  made  inevitable  in  17/6  what  was  un 
thinkable  in  1760. 

Without  considering  here  the  remote  and  latent  causes 
of  the  revolt,  a  discussion  of  the  American  Revolution  may 
profitably  begin  with  the  effort  of  the  British  government  to 
reorganize  the  British  empire  after  the  Peace  of  Paris  of 

-J_z6fr  Of  this  empire  the  thirteen  colonies  along  the  Atlantic 
seaboard  had,  by  virtue  of  the  recent  peace,  become  but  a 


THE  AMERICAN  REVOLUTION  163 

small  part.  British  statesmen  felt  the  imperative  need  of 
correcting  the  slothful  and  unsystematic  methods  of  colonial 
management  by  which  some  of  the  older  colonies  had  been 
granted  more  liberal  government  than  that  enjoyed  by 
organized  territories  of  the  United  States  today,  and  under 
which  all  the  continental  American  colonies  had  become 
neglectful  or  defiant  of  ordinary  imperial  obligations.  There 
was  a  need  that  all  the  outlying  British  possessions  should 
be  more  closely  integrated  for  purposes  of  administration 
and  that  the  far-flung  empire  should  be  defended  against  the 
ambitions  of  England's  traditional  enemies,  France  and 
Spain,  as  well  as  against  the  restlessness  of  the  alien  subject 
populations.  The  problem  which  confronted  the  British 
government  was  much  more  difficult  than  the  questions  of 
colonial  organization  with  which  the  American  government 
has  wrestled  since  1898;  but  the  American  adventure  in 
imperialism,  involving,  as  it  did,  the  question  of  whether  the 
Constitution  followed  the  flag,  should  enable  Americans  of 
the  present  generation  to  view  with  sympathy  the  British 
experiment  of  the  eighteenth  century. 

The  king's  ministers  glimpsed  too  narrowly  the  task  before 
them.  What  they  regarded  as  an  exercise  in  the  mechanics 
of  legislation  was  really  an  innovation  in  imperial  relations 
that  touched  the  dynamic  currents  of  colonial  opinion  and 
colonial  economic  interest  at  many  vital  points.  Moreover, 
their  attempt  was  being  made  at  a  time  when  the  colonies 
were,  for  the  first  time  in  their  history,  relieved  of  their  - 
most  urgent  need  of  British  protection  by  the  removal  of 
the  French  menace  from  their  frontiers.  Under  the  earlier 
imperial  policy  of  "salutary  neglect"  the  colonies  had  grown 
in  wealth  and  political  experience,  so  that  by  the  middle  of 
the  eighteenth  century  they  had  become  accustomed  to  con 
duct  themselves  toward  England  as  substantially  equal- 
commonwealths  in  a  federation  united  by  a  common  mon- 


164  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

arch.  For  the  colonists  the  new  imperial  policy  involved 
unaccustomed  tax  burdens,  the  loss  of  trading  profits,  and 
limitations  of  self-government — advantages  that  were  none 
the  less  precious  because  derived  from  an  unwritten  and  un- 
sanctioned  constitution.  Fundamentally,  the  great  problem 
of  the  decade  following  the  peace  of  1763  was  the  problem 
of  the  reconciliation  of  centralized  imperial  control  with 
colonial  home  rule.  This,  unfortunately,  was  never  clearly 
perceived  by  the  dominant  element  on  either  side,  the  issue 
being  obscured  by  a  blind  officialism  on  the  one  hand  and  by 
an  unillumined  particularism  on  the  other. 

Perhaps  the  problem  was  incapable  of  solution;  but  we 
can  see  now  that  the  best  opportunity  for  a  satisfactory 
outcome  lay  in  the  application  to  the  situation  of  an  en 
lightened  statecraft  on  the  part  of  Great  Britain.  To  this 
the  posture  of  political  affairs  in  that  country  was  not  well 
adapted.  George  III,  who  had  ascended  the  throne  in  1760, 
was  already  devoting  every  political  and  financial  resource 
in  his  power  to  the  task  of  converting  the  British  government 
from  an  aristocracy  of  great  Whig  families  into  a  personal 
autocracy.  His  Parliament  and  ministers  did  not  seek  to 
reflect  the  aspirations  of  the  British  public  and  therefore 
lacked  a  potent  incentive  for  the  formulation  of  a  conciliatory 
program  of  colonial  subordination.  The  minority  in  Parlia 
ment  represented  by  Pitt  and  Burke  readily  identified  the 
struggle  of  the  colonists  to  preserve  home  rule  with  their 
own  struggle  in  England  against  autocratic  rule.  Pitt  was 
thinking  primarily  of  Englishmen  at  home  when  he  ex 
claimed  on  the  occasion  of  the  Stamp  Act  commotions:  "I 
rejoice  that  America  has  resisted."  If  his  counsel  had  been 
followed,  it  is  possible  that  the  colonial  revolt  might  have 
been  forestalled  by  some  plan  of  imperial  federation. 


THE  AMERICAN  REVOLUTION  165 

ii 

With  this  brief  glance  at  affairs  in  Great  Britain  it  is  now 
possible  to  consider  the  situation  in  America.  Conditions 
there  were  both  simpler  and  more  complex  than  the  tradi 
tional  accounts  represent.  In  place  of  thirteen  units  of 
population  thinking  alike  on  most  public  questions,  there 
were  in  fact  three  major  bodies  of  population,  differentiated 
by  physiographical  conditions,  economic  interest  and  polit 
ical  ideals.  The  communities  on  the  coastal  plain  from  New 
Hampshire  to  Pennsylvania  constituted  one  of  these  divi- 

>  sions ;  the  settlements  of  the  tidewater  region  from  Maryland 
to  Georgia  formed  another ;  and  the  third,  less  clearly  defined 
geographically,  consisted  of  the  frontier  districts  of  many  of 
the  provinces.  These  three  divisions  represented  modes  of 

•living  and  mental  attitudes  much  more   fundamental  than 

'those  signified  by  the  artificial  groupings  of  population  within 
provincial  boundaries. 

The  fir,sl-  area  consist^  nf  fhf  mmmprn'al  colonies ;    the 
dominant  economic  interest  of  the  people  was  the  carrying  ! 
trade  and  shipbuilding.     In  the  port  towns  of  New  England  ' 
and  the  Middle  Colonies  great  mercantile  families  had  grown 
up,  who  had  gained  their  wealth  through  smuggling  with  the 
West  Indies  or  else  through  legitimate  trading  enterprises 

.  that  embraced  the  entire  world.  The  merchants  were  keenly 
alive  to  the  golden  benefits  which  membership  in  the  British 
empire  had  always  yielded ;  and  like  the  business  interests  of 
any  generation  or  clime,  they  might  be  expected  to  combat 
any  effort  to  tamper  with  the  source  of  their  profits.  For 
the  merchants  the  unfolding  of  the  new  imperial  program 
involved  a  very  serious  interference  with  their  customary> 
trading  operations;  and  during  the  decade  from  1764  to 
1774  their  constant  aim  was  to  effect  a  restoration  of  the 
commercial  conditions  of  1763.  As  a  class  they  entertained 


1 


i66  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

neither  earlier  nor  later  the  idea  of  independence,  for  with 
drawal  from  the  British  empire  meant  for  them  the  loss  of 
vital  business  advantages  without  corresponding  benefits  in 
a  world  organized  on  a  basis  of  imperial  trading  systems. 
They  strove  to  obtain  the  most  favorable  terms  possible 
within  the  empire  but  not  to  leave  it.  Indeed,  they  viewed 
with  no  small  concern  the  growth  of  republican  feeling  and 
leveling  sentiment  which  the  controversy  occasioned. 

The  great  ports  of  the  north — Boston,  New  York,  Phila 
delphia,  Newport — bore  eloquent  testimony  to  the  prosperity 
of  the  mercantile  class ;  and  on  the  continuance  of  this  pros- 
Verity  depended  the  livelihood  of  the  mechanics  and  petty 
/shopkeepers  of  the  towns  and,  to  a  lesser  degree,  the  well 
-being  of  the  farmers  whose  cereals  and  meats  were  exported 
'to  the  West  Indies.  This  proletarian  element  was  not  in 
clined  by  temperament  to  that  self-restraint  in  movements 
of  popular  protest  which  was  ever  the  arriere  pensee  of  the 
merchant  class ;  and  being  for  the  most  part  unenfranchised, 
they  expressed  their  sentiments  most  naturally  through  bois 
terous  mass  meetings  and  mob  demonstrations. 

In  the  second  of  the  three  areas,  the  tidewater  region  of 
the  South,  colonial  capital  was  invested  almost  exclusively 
in  plantation  production;  and  commerce  was  carried  on 
chiefly  by  British  mercantile  houses  and  their  American 
agents,  the  factors.  The  only  town  in  the  plantation  prov 
inces  that  could  compare  with  the  teeming  ports  of  the  North 
was  Charleston,  for  the  prevailing  form  of  life  was  rural 
in  character.  All  political  activity  sprang  from  the  periodical  4 
meetings  of  the  great  landed,  proprietors  in  the  assemblies. 
Under  the  wasteful  system  of  marketing,  which  the  apparent 
plenty  of  plantation  life  made  possible,  the  planters  found 
themselves  treading  a  morass  of  indebtedness  to  British 
merchants  from  which  it  seemed  that  nothing  less  than 
virtual  repudiation  could  extricate  them.  As  Jefferson 


THE  AMERICAN  REVOLUTION  167 

testified,  "these  debts  had  become  hereditary  from  father  to 
son,  for  many  generations,  so  that  the  planters  were  a  species 
of  property  annexed  to  certain  mercantile  houses  in  London." 
In  the  last  quarter  of  a  century  prior  to  independence  the 
provincial  assemblies  passed  a  succession  of  lax  bankruptcy 
acts  and  other  legislation  detrimental  to  non-resident  cred 
itors  ;  but  these  laws  nearly  always  ran  afoul  the  royal  veto. 
This  fact,  together  with  the  sturdy  sense  of  self-determina 
tion  which  the  peculiar  social  system  fostered,  made  the 
plantation  provinces  ready  to  resent  any  fresh  exercise  of 
parliamentary  authority  over  the  colonies,  such  as  the  new 
imperial  policy  involved.  Georgia,  the  infant  colony  of  the 
thirteen,  still  dependent  upon  the  mother  government  for 
subsidies  and  for  protection  against  a  serious  Indian  menace, 
was  less  affected  by  these  considerations,  and  indeed  lagged 
behind  her  southern  sisters  throughout  the  revolutionary 
period. 

On  the  western  f ringe  jof  jthe ...two  coastal  areas  lay  an 
irreguiaT~beit  of  back-country  settlements  whose  economy 
and  psychological  outlook  were  almost  as  distinctive  as  those 
of  the  two  tidewater  regions.  Certainly  the  western  sections 
of  many  of  the  provinces  had  grievances  in  common  and 
resembled  each  other  more  than  they  did  the  older  sections 
with  which  they  were  associated  by  provincial  boundaries. 
These  pioneer  settlements  extended  north  and  south,  up  and 
down  the  valleys  between  the  fall  line  of  the  rivers  and 
mountains,  from  New  England  to  Georgia.  Outside  of  New 
England  the  majority  of  the  settlers  were  dissenters  of  non- 
English  strains,  mostly  German  and  Scotch  Irish ;  but 
throughout  the  long  frontier  the  people  cultivated  small  iso 
lated  farms  and  entertained  democratic  ideas  in  harmony 
with  the  equalitarian  conditions  in  which  they  lived.  As  has 
already  been  pointed  out  elsewere  in  this  volume,  the  back- 
country  inhabitants  in  many  of  the  provinces  had  long  been 


. 
!  i68  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

discriminated  against  by  the  older  settlements  in  the  matter 
^  of  representation  in  the  assemblies,  the  administration  of 
justice  and  the  incidence  of  taxation;  and  they  were  thus 
familiar,  of  their  own  experience,  with  all  the  arguments 
which  the  Revolution  was  to  make  popular  against  non^ 
representative  gqyernment  and  unju,st_. taxation.  Being  self- 
sustaining  communities  economically,  their  zeal  for  popular 
rights  was  in  no  wise  alloyed  by  the  embarrassment  of  their 
pocketbooks.  Although  out  of  harmony  with  the  popular 
leaders  of  the  seaboard  in  both  the  commercial  and  plantation 
-.  provinces  on  many  matters  of  domestic  politics,  they  could 
join  forces  with  them  in  protest  against  the  new  imperial 
policy;  and  they  brought  to  the  controversy  a  moral  con 
viction  and  bold  philosophy  which  gave  great  impetus  to  the 
^  agitation  for  independence.1 

The  history  of  the  American  Revolution  is,  in  very  large 
part,  the  story  of  trie-reaction  of  these  three  sections  to  the 
successive  acts  of  the  British  government  and  of  their  inter 
action  upon  each  other,  j  ^"he  merchants  of  the  commercial 
colonies  were  the  most  seriously  alteied  by  the  new  imperial 
policy  and  at  the  outset  assumed  the  leadership  of  the  colonial 
movement  of  protest.  J/JThey  were  closely  seconded  by  the 
planters  of  the  south  as  soon  as  enough  time  had  elapsed 
to  make  clear  to  the  latter  the  implications^  the  issue  of 
home  rule  for  which  the  merchants  stood.  ^/The  democratic 
farmers  of  the  interior,  more  or  less  out  01  contact  with  the 
political  currents  of  the  seaboard,  were  slower  to  take  part; 
and  it  is  largely  true  that  their  measure  of  participation 
varied  inversely  to  the  degree  of  their  isolation.  Patrick 
Henry  and  his  fellow  burgesses  from  the  western  counties 

1  In  Georgia,  however,  the  frontier  settlers  were  pro-British  in  their  sympathies 
because  of  their  dependence  on  the  home  government  for  protection  against  the 
ever-present  menace  of  .the  Creeks.  Twenty-five  years  ago  Professor  J.  S. 
Bassett,  in  a  discriminating  study,  showed  why  the  people  of  the  interior  coun 
ties  of  North  Carolina  became  loyalists  when  the  issue  of  independence  was  raised. 
Had  the  friction  between  the  interior  democracies  and  the  coastal  minorities  de 
veloped  to  the  point  of  armed  rebellion  in  other  provinces  prior  to  1776,  the 
back-country  folk  might  everywhere  have  thrown  their  weight  on  the  side  of 
the  British  government  and  thus  have  defeated  the  Revolution. 


THE  AMERICAN  REVOLUTION  169 

of  Virginia  began  to  undermine  the  conservatism  of  the  tide 
water  statesmen  as  early  as  1765,  but  the  Germans  and 
Scotch-Irish  of  Pennsylvania  did  not  make  their  influence 

(fully  felt  until  the  critical  days  of  1774-1775. 
A  complicating  factor  in  the  revolutionary  movement  was 
supplied  by  the  religious_conditions  existing  in  the  colonies, 
of  which  only  brief  "mention  can  be  made  here.  Religious^ 
antagonisms  were  of  chief  importance ^  in  accjentuating  dif 
ferences  between  the  colonies  and  the  mother  country  that 
already  existed  because  of  economic  and  geographic  reasons. 
This  is  not  gainsaying  that  sectarian  feeling,  which  had  been 
an  important  motive  in  colonization,  played  a  larger  part  in 
shaping  the  political  conduct  of  people  in  colonial  times  than 
it  has  at  any  later  period  of  American  history.  The  great 
majority  of  the  colonists  belonged  to  the  dissenting  sects; 
and  for  historic  reasons  it  was  natural  that  there  should  be 
more  or  less  distrust  and  jealousy  felt  by  them  toward  ad 
herents  of  the  Church  of  England,  among  whom  the  royal 
officials  and  their  hangers-on  were  prominently  to  be  found. 
Indeed,  the  two  hundred  and  fifty  Episcopal  clergymen  offi 
ciating  in  the  colonies  on  the  eve  of  the  Revolutionary  War 
had  all  received  ordination  in  England,  and  most  of  those  in 
the  northern  provinces  were  pensioners  of  an  English  mis- 
;  sionary  society.  The  antagonism  to  England  on  this  score 
iwas  undoubtedly  increased  during  the  revolutionary  period 
Jin  many  parts  of  America  by  the  persistent  rumor  that  the 
English  government  was  planning  to  send  bishops  to  the^_ 
colonies.  Itjwasjohn  Adams's  belief,  expressed  in  after 
years,  that  the  widespread  dread  of  an  Anglican  episcopate^ 
and  an  established  church  contributed  "as  much  as  any  other 
cause"  to  sharpening  the  keen  edge  of  popular  antipathy 
against  the  mother  country.  As  the  radical  party  grew 
stronger,  Anglican  clergymen  had  to  decide  whether  they 
would  observe  the  patriotic  fast  days  proclaimed  as  a  protest 
against  England  and,  finally,  whether  they  would  omit  in 


170  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

their  services  the  prayers  for  the  king.     Those  who  persisted 
were  in  many  cases  roughly  handled. 

The  Congregational  ministers  of  New  England  were  active 
agents  irf  "keeping  alive  "colonial  discontent.  It  was  a  royal 
office-holder  who  noted  that  the  women  of  the  flocks  aided 
American  manufactures  by  spinning  flax  six  days  of  the 
week  and  "on  the  seventh,  the  Parsons  took  their  turns  and 
spun  out  their  prayers  and  sermons  to  a  long  thread  of 
Politics."  The  only  organic  and  official  action  taken  by  a 
religious  denomination  in  behalf  of  the  American  cause  was 
that  of  the  Presbyterians,  who  delegated  the  only  minister 
in  the  Congress  of  1776  to  give  their  vote  for  independence. 
Some  insight  into  contemporary  opinion  of  the  relation  of 
religion  to  politics  is  afforded,  for  instance,  by  the  customary 
usage  of  the  terms  Presbyterians  and  Episcopalians  by  Judge 
Thomas  Jones,  the  New  York  loyalist,  as  almost  synonymous 
with  the  terms  rebels  and  loyalists.  Joseph  Galloway,  an 
other  loyalist,  who  had  attained  high  office  in  Pennsylvania 
by  the  suffrages  of  his  fellow-colonists,  ascribed  the  colonial 
revolt  largely  to  the  machinations  of  the  Presbyterians  and 
the  New  England  Congregationalists  and  believed  that  the 
alliance  formed  by  the  two  sects  in  1764  was  a  factor  of 
prime  importance  in  the  promotion  of  the  spirit  for  inde 
pendence.  Such  generalizations  may  be  pushed  too  far, 
however,  for  numerous  exceptions  may  be  noted.  Thus  the 
Episcopalians  of  the  southern  tidewater  region,  where  the 
ministers  were  supported  locally,  were  as  strongly  opposed 
to  the  importation  of  English  prelates  as  were  the  Congre 
gationalists  of  New  England,  and  many  of  the  clergy  and 
laity  took  active  part  in  the  Revolutionary  War. 

-  in 

The  new  British  policy  of  imperial  control  assumed  its 
'first    form    under    George    Grenville     (1764-1765)..    The 


THE  AMERICAN  REVOLUTION  171 

numerous  regulations  of  trade,  which  need  not  be  analyzed 
here,  injured  fair  traders  and  smuggling  merchants  alike  and 
threatened- bankruptcy  to  the  great  mercantile  houses  of 
Boston,  New  York  and  Philadelphia.  The  prohibition  of 
colonial  legal  tender  added  to  their  woes  and  indeed  made  " 

I  the  hard-pressed  planters  of  the  South  sharers  in  the  general 
distress.  The  Stamp  Act,  with  its  far-reaching  taxes  burden 
some  alike  to  mefcnant  and  -farmer,  sealed  the  union  of 
commercial  and  plantation  provinces  at  the  same  time  that  ; 

lit  afforded  an  opportunity  for  placing  the  colonial  argument 

(on  constitutional  grounds;  and  because  of  the  character  01 
the  taxation,  it  rallied  to  the  colonial  position  the  powerful 
support  of  the  lawyers  and  newspaper  proprietors.  The 
plan  of  the  British  to  garrison  their  new  acquisitions  in 

'America  and  to  station  a  few  detachments  of  troops  in  the 
older  colonies  was,  in  the  feverish  state  of  the  public  mind, 
envisaged  as  a  brazen  attempt  to  intimidate  the  colonies  into 
submission.  The  merchants  of  some  of  the  ports,  intent  on 
restoring  the  conditions  of  their  former  prosperity,  adopted 
resolutions  of  non-importation ;  and  little  recking  the  future, 
they  aroused  the  populace  to  a  sense  of  British  injustice,  even 
to  the  extent  of  countenancing  and  instigating  mob  excesses 
and  the  destruction -erf  property. 

In  the  end  Parliament  resolved  upon  the  passage  of  certain- 
remedial  laws  (1766),  an  outcome  which,  from  the  stand 
point  of  the  more  radical  colonists,  can  be  regarded  as  little 
more  than  a  compromise.  The  Stamp  Act  -was  indeed  re-* 
pealed  and  important  alterations  were  made  in  the  trade 
regulations ;  but  the  Currency  Act,  the  regulations^  against 
smuggling  and  the  provisions  for  a  standing  army  remained 
unchanged.  In  addition  the  Declaratory  Act  was  passed; 
and  the  new  molasses  duty  was  an  unvarnished  application 
of  the  principle  of  "taxation  without  representation"  an- 
nounc^d  in  the  Declaratory  Act.  The  rejoicing  of  the  col- 


172  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

'  onists  can  be  explained  only  on  the  ground  that  the  merchants 
of  the  North  dominated  colonial  opinion;  and  like  practical 
men  of  affairs,  they  were  contemptuous,  if  not  fearful,  of 
disputes  turning  upon  questions  of  abstract  right. 

The  passage  of  the  Townshend  Acts  in   1767  was  the 

V  second  attempt  of  Parliament  to  reconstruct  the'erripire'  in ' 
the  spirit  of  the  Grenville  experiment.  Again  the  merchants 
of  the  commercial  colonies  perceived  themselves  as  the  class 
whose  interests  were  chiefly  imperiled ;  but  sobered  by  the 
mob  outrages  of  Stamp  Act  days,  they  resolved  to  guide  the 
course  of  American  opposition  in  orderly  and  peaceful  chan 
nels.  •'They,  therefore,  began  an  active  agitation  for  correc 
tive  legislation  through  merchants'  petitions  and  legislative 
memorials  to  Parliament;  and  after  much  questioning  of 
each  other's  good  faith  they  succeeded  in  developing  an 
elaborate  system  of  commercial  boycott,  which  united  the 
commercial  colonies  in  an  effort  to  secure  the  repeal  of  the 
objectionable  laws.  After  a  year  or  so  this  movement  in 
a  much  modified  form  spread  to  the  plantation  provinces, 
where,  under  the  leadship  of  Washington  and  other  planters, 
it  was  employed  as  a  means  of  preventing  the  landed  aris 
tocracy  from  falling  more  deeply  into  the  toils  of  their  British 
creditors. 

Meantime  the  merchants  began  to  see  that  in  organizing 
their  communities  for  peaceful  resistance  to  Great  Britain 
they  were  unavoidably  releasing  disruptive  forces  which,  like  » 

*  Frankenstein's  monster,  they  were  finding  it  impossible  to 
control.  The  failure  of  non-importation  to  effect  swift  re 
dress  compelled  the  merchant  bodies,  as  the  months  passed, 
to  depend  more  and  more  upon  the  tumultuous  methods  of  , 
the  proletariat  in  order  to  keep  wavering  merchants  true  to  \ 
the  cause.  Increasing  friction  between  smuggling  merchants  / 

^  and  customs  officers  also  produced  outbreaks  of  mob  violence  ' 
in  many  provinces,  and  led  by  a  broad,  smooth  road  t%  such  i 
distressing  affairs  as  the  Boston  "Massacre"  on  the  one  hand  I 


THE  AMERICAN  REVOLUTION  173 

and  to  the  destruction  of  the  revenue  cutter  Gaspee  on  the, 
other.     As   the   political   agitators   and   turbulent   elements  ^ 
gained  the  upper  hand,  the  contest  began  to  assume  more     I 
clearly  the  form  of  a  crusade  for  constitutional  and  natural    J 
; rights;   and  when  word  arrived  in  May,  1770,  that  Parlia 
ment  had  repealed  all  the  Townshend  duties   except  the 
trifling  tax  on  tea,  the  merchants  found  it  difficult  to  reassert  ^ 
their  earlier  control  and  to  stop  a  movement  that  had  lost  all 
( significance  for  hard-headed _meii_o£  business.     The  mer 
chants  of  New^York,  under  the  leadership  of  their  newly 
formed  Chamber  of  Commerce,  were  the  first  who  were 
able  to  wrench  loose  from  their  enforced  alliance  with  the 
radicals;  and  the  cancellation  of  their  boycott  resolutions 
was  soon  followed  by  similar  action  in  the  ports  of  Phila 
delphia  and  Boston.     The  plantation  provinces  were  coolly 
left  in  the  lurch  notwithstanding  that  Parliament  had  not 
receded  from  its  position  of  arbitrary  taxation,  and  the  move-     . 
ment  there  soon  died  of  inanition. 

The  two  or  three  years  that  followed  the  partial  repeal  of 
the  Townshend  duties  were,  for  the  most  part,  years  of  - 
material  prosperity  and  political  calm.  The  merchants  had 
grown  to  look  askance  at  a  doctrine  of  home  rule  which  left 
it  uncertain  who  was  to  rule  at  home.  As  a  class  they 
eagerly  agreed  with  the  merchant-politician  Thomas  Cush- 
ing  that  "high  points  about  the  supreme  authority  of  Parlia 
ment"  should  best  "fall  asleep."  And  so — John  Hancock  as 
well  as  Isaac  Low — they  deserted  politics  for  business,  even  • 
to  the  extent  of  importing  dutied  tea  which  people  imbibed 
everywhere  except  at  Philadelphia  and  New  York,  where 
local  conditions  made  it  possible  for  merchants  to  offer  the 
cheaper  Dutch  tea  to  consumers.  The  sun  of  the  radicals 
had  suffered  an  eclipse;  and  quietly  biding  their  time,  they 
began  to  apply  to  their  own  following  the  lessons  of  organi 
zation  that  they  had  learned  from  the  "mercantile  dons."  In 
the  commercial  colonies  Sam  Adams — "that  Matchiavel  of  - 


^ 


174  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

Chaos"  as  Thomas  Hutchinson  loved  to  call  him — sought, 
through  the  establishment  of  town  committees  of  correspon 
dence,  to  unite  the  workingmen  of  the  port  towns  and  the 
farmers  of  the  rural  districts  in  political  action;  and  the 
burgesses  of  Virginia  launched  their  plan  of  a  provincial 
committee  of  correspondence  that  might  give  uncensored 
expression  to  the  political  grievances  of  the  southern  plant 
ers.  Under  the  spur  of  fresh  irritations  both  plans  were  to 
spread  to  the  other  provinces  where,  by  supplementing  each 
other,  they  came  in  time  to  form  the  basis  of  the  radical 
party  organization  throughout  British  America. 

In  May,  1773,  a  new  tea  act  was  passed  by  Parliament, 
^ which  stampeded  the  merchants  into  joining  forces  once 
more  with  the  political  radicals  and  irresponsible  elements. 
This  new  law,  if  put  into  operation,  would  have  enabled  the 
great  East  India  Company  to  monopolize  the  colonial  tea 
market  to  the  exclusion  of  both  American  smugglers  and 
law-abiding  tea  traders.  Alarmed  at  this  prospect  and  fear 
ful  lest  further  monopolistic  privileges  in  trade  might  follow 
from  the  success  of  the  present  experiment,  the  colonial 
merchant  class  joined  in  an  active  popular  agitation  for  the 
purpose  of  preventing  the  landing  of  any  of  the  tea  importa 
tions  of  the  East  India  Company.  Though  their  efforts  for 
a  vigorous  but  restrained  opposition  met  with  substantial 
success  elsewhere,  they  were  overreached  at  Boston  by  the 
superior  management  of  Sam  Adams  and  the  unintelligence 
of  Governor  Hutchinson,  whose  sons  were  tea  consignees; 
and  the  British  trading  company  became  the  involuntary  host 
at  a  tea  party  costing  £15,000. 

IV 

, 

The  Boston  Tea  Party  marked  a  tunning  point  in  the 

course  of  events  both  in  America  and  Britain.  In  both 
countries  it  was  regarded  by  the  merchants  and  moderates 


THE  AMERICAN  REVOLUTION  175 

as  a  lawless  destruction  of  private  property  and  an  act  of  \ 
wanton  defiance  which  no  self-respecting  government  could 
wisely  ignore.     Plainly  the  issue  between  the  colonies  and    . — 
the  mother  country  had  ceased  to  be  one  of  mere  trading 
advantage.     Outside  of  New  England,  colonial  opinion,  so 
far  as  it  expressed  itself,  greeted  the  event  with  a  general 
disapproval  and  apprehension.     In  the  mother  country  Par 
liament  proceeded  to  the  passage  of  the  severe  disciplinary-^ 
measures  of  1774. 

The  effect  of  this  punitive  legislation  cannot  be  overesti-\ 
mated,  for  it  convinced  many  colonists  who  had  disapproved 
of  the  Boston  vandalism  that  the  greater  guilt  now  lay  on 

jthe  side  of  Parliament.  "They  look  upon  the  chastisement 
of  Boston  to  be  purposely  rigorous,  and  held  up  by  way  of 
intimidation  to  all  America  .  .  ."  wrote  Governor  Penn 
from  Philadelphia.  "Their  delinquency  in  destroying  the 
East  India  Company's  tea  is  lost  in  the  attention  given  to 
what  is  here  called  the  too  severe  punishment  of  shutting  up 
the  port,  altering  the  Constitution,  and  making  an  Act,  as 
they  term  it,  screening  the  officers  and  soldiers  shedding 
American  blood."  From  this  time  on  there  occurred  in  the 
several  provinces  a  contest  for  the  control  of  public  policy 
between  the  moderates  on  the  one  hand  and  the  radicals  of' 
extremists  on  the  other,  the  former  receiving  aid  and  com 
fort  from  the  royal  officials  and  their  circle  of  friends.  This 

'line  of  cleavage  is  unmistakable  in  the  case  of  practically 
every  province. 

The  moderates  as  a  group  wanted  to  pay  for  the  tea 
destroyed  and  to  propose  to  Parliament  an  act  of  union 
which  should  automatically  dispose  of  all  controversial  ques 
tions  for  the  future.  The  radicals  were  opposed  to  compro 
mise  and  as  a  class  desired  a  comprehensive  and  drastic 
boycott  of  Great  Britain  with  which  to  exact  from  Parlia 
ment  recognition  of  the  colonial  claim  to  complete  home 


i;6  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

rule.     Both  parties  were  willing  to  make  a  trial  of  strength 

in  an  intercolonial  congress;  and  after  bitter  -contests  in 

each  province  to  control  the  personnel  of  the  irregularly 

.elected  delegations,  the  First  Continental  Congress  assem- 

Nbled  in  Philadelphia  in  September,   1774.     In  this  notable 

gathering  the   moderates   discovered  to  their   dismay  that 

they  were  outnumbered;  and,  in  the  disconsolate  phrase  of  a 

'  Maryland  merchant,  "Adams,  with  his  crew,  and  the  haughty 

Sultans  of  the  South  juggled  the  whole  conclave  of  the 

Delegates."    Indeed,  this  extra-legal  body,  by  adopting  the 

/  Association  for  the  establishment  of  non-importation,  non- 

V  consumption   and   non-exportation,   decreed   that  the   mer- 

\  chants  of  America  should  sacrifice  their  trade  for  the  benefit 

of  a  cause  from  which  they  had  become  alienated;  and  the 

radicals  in  Congress  provided  for  spreading  a  network  of 

committees  over  the  continent  to  insure  obedience  to  their 

decree. 

In  the  popular  conventions  called  prior  to  the  First  Conti 
nental  Congress  and  in  the  provincial  meetings  that  were 
held  to  ratify  its  doings,  the  people  from  the  backncountry 
counties  of  many  provinces  were,  for  the  first  time,  admitted 
to  that  full  measure  of  representation  which  had  long  been 
denied  them  by  the  unequal  system  of  apportionment  in  the 
colonial  assemblies.  Deeply  stirred  by  the  political  slogans 
of  the  tidewater  radicals,  they  ranged  themselves  by  their 
side  and  lent  momentum  to  an  agitation  that  was  hastening 
toward  independence.  In  closely  divided  provinces  like 
Pennsylvania  and  South  Carolina  their  voice  was  undoubt 
edly  the  decisive  factor. 

The  proceedings  of  the  First  Continental  Congress  were 
received  with  mixed  feelings  by  the  colonists.  The  mod 
erates  who  had  lingered  in  the  popular  movement  in  order  to 
control  it  began  to  withdraw,  although  it  required  the  out 
break  of  hostilities  at  Lexington  or  even  the  Declaration 


THE  AMERICAN  REVOLUTION 

of  Independence  to  convince  some  that  their  efforts  could  be 
of  no  avail.  The  merchants  perforce  acquiesced  in  the  regu 
lations  of  the  Association,  which,  in  the  early  months,  were 
not  without  profit  to  them.  The  popular  committees  of  the 
coast  towns,  formerly  controlled  by  the  merchants,  began  to 
fall  into  the  hands  of  the  democratic  mechanic  class.  In 
New  York,  Boston  and  Philadelphia  alike,  "nobodies"  and 
"unimportant  persons"  succeeded  to  power;  and  even  in 
Savannah,  Governor  Wright  declared  that  "the  Parochial 
Committee  are  a  Parcel  of  the  Lowest  People,  Chiefly  Car 
penters,  Shoemakers,  Blacksmiths,  &c.  .  .  ."  Flushed  with 
success,  the  radical  leaders  busied  themselves  with  consoli 
dating  their  following  in  town  and  country  through  the 
creation  of  committees  of  observation  and  provincial  com 
mittees  and  conventions.  Little  wonder  was  it  that,  in  this 
changed  aspect  of  public  affairs,  a  worthy  minister  of 
Charleston,  S.  C.,  should  be  dismissed  by  his  congregation 
"for  his  audacity  in  ...  saying  that  mechanics  and  country 
clowns  had  no  right  to  dispute  about  politics,  or  what  kings, 
lords  and  commons  had  done,"  or  that  the  Newport  Mercury 
of  September  26,  1774,  in  reporting  the  affair  should  add: 
"All  such  divines  should  be  taught  to  know  that  mechanics 
and  country  clowns  (infamously  so  called)  are  the  real  and 
absolute  masters  of  king,  lords,  commons  and  priests.  .  .  ." 
Events  had  reached  a  stage  where  the  extremists  in  both 
countries  were  in  control.  What  Chatham  and  Joseph  Gallo 
way  might  have  adjusted  to  their  mutual  satisfaction  could 
not  be  rationally  discussed  by  North  and  Sam  Adams. 
Under  the  circumstances  it  was  inevitable  that  the  policy  of 
commercial  coercion^  adopted  _byjthe  First  Continental  Con-u 
gress,  should  soon  be  superseded  by  armed  warfare  as  the 
weapon  of  the  radicals,  and  that  open  rebellion  should  in 
turn  give  way  to  a  struggle  for  independence.  The  throng 
ing  events  of  these  later  months  are  familiar  enough  in  out- 


178  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

line  and  need  not  be  recounted  here.  The  key  to  these 
times  is  to  be  found  in  the  fact  that  the  radical  elements 
were  a  minority  of  the  colonial  population  and  tKat  only 
through  their  effective  organization  and  aggressive  tactics 
could  they  hope  Wwhip  irrttHline  the  great  body  of  timid 
and  indifferent  people  who  lacked  either  organization  or  a 
definite  program. 

The  successive  steps  leading  to  independence  were  not 
taken  without  great  mental  travail,  without  suspicion  of  each 
other's  motives,  without  sordid  consultation  of  economic  ad 
vantage,  or  without  doubt  as  to  the  rectitude  of  the  course 
or  fear  of  the  consequences.  /Thousands  of  men  of  recog 
nized  social  and  business  connections,  who  had  been  active  in 
the  earlier  agitation  for  colonial  home  rule,  opposed  separa 
tion  and  left  their  native  land  rather  than  be  witnesses  to  its 
undoing.  One  of  these  earnestly  warned  his  countrymen  in 
April,  1776,  that  "a  set  of  men  whom  nobody  knows  .  .  . 
are  attempting  to  hurry  you  into  a  scene  of  anarchy;  their 
scheme  of  Independence  is  visionary;  they  know  not  them 
selves  what  they  mean  by  it."  On  the  other  hand,  John 
Adams  found  food  for  sober  reflection  in  the  rejoicing  of  a 
horse-jockey  neighbor  of  his :  "Oh !  Mr.  Adams,  what  great 
things  have  you  and  your  colleagues  done  for  us !  -.--.  .  There 
are  no  courts  of  justice  now  in  this  Province  and  I  hope 
there  never  will  be  another."  Many  a  man  of  property,  like 
the  patriot  Henry  Laurens,  wept  when  he  listened  to  the 
reading  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  or  else,  like 
John  Ross  of  Philadelphia,  "loved  ease  and  Madeira  much 
better  than  liberty  and  strife,"  and  decided  to  be  neutral  in 
the  struggle. 

The  real  significance  of  the  American  Revolution,  how 
ever,  is  not  to  be  measured  in  terms  of  the  conflicting  emo 
tions  and  purposes  of  those  who,  wittingly  or  unwittingly, 
helped  to  bring  it  about,  ^Vhat  great  issue  in  history  has 


THE  AMERICAN  REVOLUTION  179 

not  been  scarred  by  sordid  motives,  personal  antagonisms 
and  unintelligent  decisions?  /  Fundamentally  the  American 
Revolution  represented  the  refusal  of  a  self-reliant  people  to 
rjgrmit  their  natural  and  normal  energies  to  be  confined 
against  their  will,  whether  by  an  irresponsible  imperial  gov*. 
^rnrnent  or  by  the  ruling  minorities  in  their  midst. 


The  popular  view  of  the  Revolution  as  a  great  forensic 
controversy  over  abstract  governmental  rights  will  not  bear 
close  scrutiny.  How  could  a  people,  who  for  ten  years 
were  not  in  agreement  among  themselves  as  to  their  aims 
and  aspirations,  be  said  to  possess  a  common  political  philos 
ophy  ?  Before  assuming  that  Otis  or  Dickinson  or  Thomson 
Mason  spoke  the  voice  of  the  colonists,  the  historian  must 
first  ascertain  what  class  or  section  of  the  population  each 
represented  and  how  widespread  its  influence  was.  /  At  best,  .  -  /,  < 
an  exposition  of  the  political  theories  of  the  ami-parlia 
mentary  party  is  an  account  of  their  retreat  from  one  stra 
tegic  position  to  another.  Abandoning  a  view  that  based 
their  liberties  on  charter  grants,  they  appealed  to  their  cent- 
stitutional  rights  as  Englishmen;  and  when  that  position 
became  untenable,  they  invoked  the  doctrine  of  the  rights  of 
man.  Likewise,  their  sincere  devotion  to  the  kingship  was 
not  open  to  question  through  ten  years  of  controversy,  when 
suddenly,  a  few  months  before  the  end,  the  English  immi 
grant  Tom  Paine  in  the  pamphlet  Common  Sense  jerked  the 
bandages  from  their  eyes  and  revealed  the  goal  of  republi-' 
canism  and  independence  at  which  they  had  already  arrived 
in  fact.  WitMout  discounting  in  any  way  the  propagandist 
value  attaching  to  popular  shibboleths  as  such,  it  may  as  well 
be  admitted  that  the  colonists  would  have  lost  their  case  if 
the  decision  had  turned  upon  an  impartial  consideration  of 
the  legal  principles  involved.  ) 


i8o  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

Some  of  the  difficulties  in  arriving  at  the  truth  concerning 
the  Tories  may  also  be  apparent.  Prior  to  1774,  it  would  be 
a  distortion  of  the  facts  to  picture  the  country  as  divided 
into  two  major  parties,  one  representing  blind  attachment  to 
the  doctrine  of  parliamentary  supremacy  and  the  other  a 
blind  partisanship  of  the  doctrine  of  colonial  home  rule. 
Rather,  the  American  colonists,  united  in  desiring  a  large 
degree  of  colonial  autonomy,  differed  in  opinion  as  to  what 
limitations  of  home  rule  were  admissable  and  as  to  what 
methods  of  opposition  were  best  adapted  to  secure  the  relief 
they  desired.  In  this  period  every  true  American  was  a 
*  loyalist  in  the  sense  that  he  favored  the  permanent  integrity 
of  the  British  empire.  Indeed,  to  regard  "Tory"  and  "loy 
alist"  as  equivalent  terms  would  place  the  historian  in  the 
predicament  of  classing  practically  the  entire  colonial  popu 
lation  as  Tories  until  1776. 

Excepting  always  the  royal  official  class  and  its  social  con 
nections,  the  terms  "Tory"  and  "patriot"  became  intelligible 
for  the  first  time  when  the  First  Continental  Congress  set 
forth  the  radical  program  in  the  Continental  Association  and 
stigmatized  those  who  opposed  the  program  as  "enemies  of 
American  liberty."  As  the  radical  program  advanced  from 
commercial  coercion  to  armed  rebellion,  the  local  committees 
applied  a  new  test  of  patriotism,  that  of  allegiance  to  the 
rebellion.  It  should  be  remembered,  however,  that  the  origi 
nal  object  of  this  armed  uprising  was  not  independence  but, 
'as  often  in  English  history,  a 


With  the  Declaration  of  Independence  patriotism  became  for 
,  the  first  time  synonymous  with  disloyalty  to  England.  Many 
men,  like  Daniel  Dulany  and  Joseph  Galloway,  who  may 
rightly  be  considered  broad-minded  patriotic  Americans  in 
the  earlier  years  of  the  revolutionary  contest,  became  Tories 
by  the  new  definitions  ;  and  John  Dickinson  is  the  example 
of  a  man  who  narrowly  escaped  the  infamy  of  not  making 


THE  AMERICAN  REVOLUTION  181 

up  his  mind  in  favor  of  independence  as  quickly  as  the 
majority  of  the  Second  Continental  Congress.  The  disor 
ders  of  the  Confederation  period  were  a  justification  of  the 
decision  made  by  the  Tories ;  but  the  reconstructive  forces  in 
American  society  which  built  a  nationalistic  republic  under 
the  Constitution  have  eloquently  vindicated  the  choice  made 
by  the  revolutionists. 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

A  history  of  the  histories  of  the  American  Revolution  should  go 
far  toward  revealing  the  ideals  and  purposes  which  have  governed 
historical  writing  in  this  country  in  the  various  periods  of  the  past 
and  should  explain  why  the  Revolution  has  had  to  be  re-discovered 
and  re-constructed  from  the  source  materials  by  the  present  genera 
tion  of  historians.  Sydney  George  Fisher  has  undertaken  such  a 
survey  in  his  essay  'The  Legendary  and  Myth-Making  Process  in 
Histories  of  the  American  Revolution,"  originally  published  in  the 
Proceedings  of  the  American  Philosophical  Society,  vol.  51  (1912), 
PP.  S3-/6,  and  reprinted  in  the  History  Teacher's  Magazine,  vol.  iv 
(I9I3)J  PP-  63-71,  and  elsewhere.  Pertinent  information  on  the 
same  subject  may  be  found  in  the  "Critical  Essay  on  Authorities" 
in  George  Elliott  Howard's  Preliminaries  of  the  Revolution,  1763- 
1775  (in  The  American  Nation:  a  History,  vol.  8;  New  York, 
1905)- 

Charles  Altschul's  study,  The  American  Revolution  in  Our  School 
Text-Books  (New  York,  1917),  is  excellent,  so  far  as  it  goes,  in 
showing  the  one-sided  and  misleading  treatment  of  the  American 
Revolution  contained  in  the  school  histories  of  a  generation  ago. 

Reappraisement  of  the  conflict  by  historians  using  scientific 
methods  began  in  the  nineties  and  the  most  valuable  work  along 
this  line  has  been  done  since  1900.  The  pioneer  labors  of  Charles 
McLean  Andrews  and  Herbert  Levi  Osgood  in  showing  that  the 
history  of  the.  colonies  must  be  studied  as  an  integral  part  of  British 
imperial  history  were  of  basic  importance  to  this  reappraisement. 
Their  point  of  view,  arrived  at  as  the  result  of  independent  studies, 
was  first  presented  in  the  form  of  papers  before  the  American 
Historical  Association  in  1898.  See  "American  Colonial  History, 
1690-1750"  by  Professor  Andrews  and  "The  Study  of  American 
Colonial  History"  by  Professor  Osgood  in  the  Annual  Report  of 
the  American  Historical  Association  for  1898,  pp.  46-60,  63-73.  The 
actual,  as  contrasted  with  the  fancied,  effects  of  the  British  acts 
of  trade  and  navigation  on  the  colonies  were  first  set  forth  by 
George  Louis  Beer  in  his  monograph  The  Commercial  Policy  of 
England  toward  the  American  Colonies  (New  York,  1893),  de 
veloped  by  the  English  economist,  W.  J.  Ashley,  in  his  Surveys 


182  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

Historic  and  Economic  (New  York,  1900),  pp.  309-360,  and  further 
amplified  by  George  Louis  Beer  in  a  series  of  volumes  entitled 
British  Colonial  Policy,  1754-1765  (New  York,  1907),  The  Origins 
of  the  British  Colonial  System,  1578-1660  (New  York,  1908),  and 
The  Old  Colonial  System,  1660-1754  (New  York,  1912). 

The  sectional  and  economic  basis  of  colonial  discontent,  ignored 
or  misunderstood  by  the  earlier  historians,  has  been  the  subject  of 
careful  study  in  such  works  as  Mellen  Chamberlain's  "The  Revolu 
tion  Impending"  in  Justin  Winsor's  Narrative  and  Critical  History 
of  America  (8  v. ;  Boston,  1884-1889),  vol.  vi,  pp.  1-112;  William 
Wirt  Henry's  Patrick  Henry;  Life,  Correspondence  and  Speeches 
(3  v.;  New  York,  1891);  John  Spencer  Bassett's  "The  Regulators 
of  North  Carolina  (1756-1771)"  in  the  Annual  Report  of  the 
American  Historical  Association  for  1894,  pp.  141-212;  C.  H.  Lin 
coln's  The  Revolutionary  Movement  in  Pennsylvania,  1760-1776 
(Philadelphia,  1901);  Carl  L.  Becker's  The  History  of  Political 
Parties  in  the  Province  of  New  York,  1760-1776  (Madison,  1909)  ; 
H.  J.  Eckenrode's  The  Revolution  in  Virginia  (Boston,  1916)  ; 
Charles  McLean  Andrews's  "The  Boston  Merchants  and  the  Non- 
Importation  Movement"  in  Publications  of  the  Colonial  Society  of 
Massachusetts,  vol.  xix  (1917),  pp.  159-259;  Arthur  Meier 
Schlesinger's  The  Colonial  Merchants  and  the  American  Revolution, 
1763-1776  (New  York,  1918)  ;  and  Edith  Anna  Bailey's  Influences 
toward  Radicalism  in  Connecticut,  1754-177 5  (Northampton,  1920). 

Some  light  hag  been  thrown  upon  the  organization  and  methods 
of  the  popular  party  by  Henry  B.  Dawson's  The  Sons  of  Liberty  in 
New  York  (New  York,  1859)  ;  Richard  Frothingham's  The  Rise  of 
the  Republic  of  the  United  States  (Boston,  1881);  and  E.  D. 
Collins's  "Committees  of  Correspondence  of  the  American  Revolu 
tion"  in  the  Annual  Report  of  the  American  Historical  Association 
for  1901,  vol.  i,  pp.  243-271. 

The  activities  and  views  of  the  loyalist  element  of  the  population 
received  partisan  justification  in  such  early  works  as  Lorenzo 
Sabine's  Biographical  Sketches  of  Loyalists  of  the  American  Revo 
lution  (2  v. ;  Boston,  1864)  and  Egerton  Ryerson's  Loyalists  of 
America  and  Their  Times  (2  v. ;  Toronto,  1880),  and  have  since 
been  studied  from  a  disinterested  viewpoint  by  George  E.  Ellis  in 
"The  Loyalists"  in  Winsor's  Narrative  and  Critical  History  (cited 
above),  vol.  vii,  pp.  185-214,  by  Moses  Coit  Tyler  in  The  Literary 
History  of  the  American  Revolution,  1763-1783  (2  v. ;  New  York, 
1897),  by  Alexander  C.  Flick  in  Loyalism  in  New  York  in  the 
American  Revolution  (New  York,  1901),  and  by  Claude  Halstead 
Van  Tyne  in  Loyalists  in  the  American  Revolution  (New  York, 
1902). 

Religious  and  sectarian  influences  in  the  revolutionary  movement 
have  received  attention  in  W.  P.  Breed's  Presbyterians  and  the 
Revolution  (Philadelphia,  1876);  Mellen  Chamberlain's  John  Adams, 
the  Statesman  of  the  American  Revolution,  with  Other  Essays 
(Boston,  1884)  ;  George  E.  Ellis's  "The  Sentiment  of  Independence, 
Its  Growth  and  Consummation"  in  Winsor's  Narrative  and  Critical 
History  (cited  above),  vol.  vi,  pp.  231-255;  Arthur  Lyon  Cross's 


THE  AMERICAN  REVOLUTION  183 

The  Anglican  Episcopate  and  the  American  Colonies  (Cambridge, 
1902)  ;  Martin  I.  J.  Griffin's  Catholics  and  the  American  Revolution 
(3  v.;  Ridley  Park,  Pa.,  1907);  and  Claude  Halstead  Van  Tyne's 
"Influence  of  the  Clergy,  and  of  Religious  and  Sectarian  Forces,  on 
the  American  Revolution"  in  the  American  Historical  Review,  vol. 
xix  (1913),  PP-  44-64- 

The  best  general  summaries  of  the  American  Revolution  today 
are  Sydney  George  Fisher's  The  Struggle  for  American  Independ 
ence  (2  v. ;  Philadelphia,  1908)  ;  Edward  Channing's  A  History  of 
the  United  States,  vol.  iii  (New  York,  1912)  ;  Carl  Lotus  Becker's 
Beginnings  of  the  American  People  (Boston,  1912),  chaps,  v-vi.  A 
forthcoming  book  by  Clarence  W.  Alvord  under  the  projected  title 
of  Imperial  Muddlers  and  the  American  Revolution:  an  Essay  about 
Propaganda  and  Politics  promises  to  be  of  great  importance  in  this 
connection.  Of  the  English  accounts  the  best  continues  to  be  W. 
E.  H.  Lecky's  History  of  England  in  the  Eighteenth  Century  (8  v. ; 
London,  1878-1890),  vol.  iii,  chap,  xii,  edited  in  a  separate  volume 
by  J.  A.  Woodburn  under  the  title  The  American  Revolution,  1763- 
1783  (New  York,  1898). 

An  important  conference  devoted  to  a  discussion  of  our  present 
knowledge  of  the  American  Revolution  was  held  in  conjunction 
with  the  recent  meeting  of  the  American  Historical  Association  at 
St.  Louis  (December,  1921).  The  principal  papers  were  presented 
by  Professor  Van  Tyne  and  Professor  Alvord. 


CHAPTER   VIII 

ECONOMIC  ASPECTS  OF  THE  MOVEMENT  FOR  THE 
CONSTITUTION 


In  the  year  1781  the  Articles  of  Confederation  were  rati 
fied  by  the  last  of  the  thirteen  states  and  went  into  effect  as 
the  first  written  constitution  of  the  federal  union.  In  the 
same  year  occurred  the  battle  of  Yorktown,  which  from  a 
military  point  of  view  assured  independence  to  the  strug 
gling  colonies.  The  war  was  practically  at  an  end.  Emerging 
from  six  years  of  armed  conflict,  the  young  republic  had  to 
solve  even  more  difficult  problems  in  the  six  years  of  peace 
that  followed. 

The  population  was  deeply  affected  by  post  bellum  unrest, 
and  public  life  gave  evidence  of  that  lowering  of  moral  tone 
that  seems  an  inevitable  aftermath  of  a  great  war.  The 
frame  of  government  under  which  the  new  nation  made  its 
start  had  been  drawn  up  by  men  laboring  under  a  desperate 
fear  of  centralized  power  as  embodied  in  the  British  govern 
ment  and  who  were  determined  that  the  new  federal  gov 
ernment,  notwithstanding  its  different  source  of  authority, 
should  exercise  as  little  power  as  possible.  Under  the 
circumstances  the  Articles  of  Confederation  could  hardly  be 
more  than  a  feeble  instrument.  All  essential  powers  re 
mained  with  the  individual  states ;  and  it  was  only  by  virtue 
of  an  extraordinary  majority  vote  that  the  general  govern 
ment  might  perform  certain  carefully  stipulated  functions  in 
behalf  of  all  the  states.  Obviously,  such  a  government  was 

184 


MOVEMENT  FOR  THE  CONSTITUTION    185 

unfitted  to  cope  with  the  social  and  political  disturbances 
that  were  to  mark  the  period. 

The  instability  of  the  times  wer-e  far-reaching  in  its  effects 
and  pervaded  not  only  the  operations  of  the  state  and  federal 
governments  but  also  the  life  of  the  people  in  their  social 
and  business  relations.  The  ill-paid  revolutionary  army, 
seething  with  unrest,  was  a  prolific  source  of  uneasiness. 
The  main  body  of  the  troops  were  encamped  at  Newburg  on 
the  Hudson,  and  they  faced  a  return  to  their  home  and  fami 
lies,  after  their  arduous  campaigns,  "without  a  settlement  of 
their  accounts,  or  a  farthing  of  money  in  their  pockets." 
Only  the  personal  intervention  of  Washington  at  a  critical 
juncture  prevented  the  consummation  of  a  plot  to  effect  a 
forcible  presentation  of  their  claims  to  Congress.  A  band 
of  mutinous  Pennsylvania  troops  stationed  at  Lancaster  did 
indeed  march  on  Philadelphia  and  frightened  Congress  into 
changing  the  seat  of  government  to  Princeton. 

On  the  trans-Alleghany  frontier  the  spirit  of  lawlessness 
also  stalked  abroad.  For  three  years  backwoodsmen  living 
in  what  is  now  eastern  Tennessee  defied  their  parent  state  of 
North  Carolina  and,  on  their  own  cognizance,  demanded 
admission  into  the  union  as  the  State  of  Franklin.  The 
integrity  of  Virginia  was  likewise  menaced  by  a  movement 
for  independent  statehood  among  the  settlers  of  Kentucky. 
Congress  sought  to  promote  further  settlement  of  the  west 
ern  country  under  national  supervision  by  the  Ordinances  of 
1784  and  1785 ;  but  none  but  the  most  daring  were  willing  to 
brave  the  perils  of  frontier  life  without  military  protection 
against  the  savages. 

The  public  finances  were  in  unbelievably  bad  shape.  Con 
tinental  paper  money  had  depreciated  to  a  point  where  an 
enterprising  barber  found  it  a  matter  of  economy  to  paper 
his  shop  with  scrip;  and  the  general  disgust  resulted  in  the 
coining  of  a  phrase  that  has  survived  to  our  own  time — "not 


186  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

worth  a  continental."  Lacking  taxing  power,  the  Confed 
eration  government  was  unable  to  pay  the  interest  on  the 
national  debt,  and  the  common  selling  price  of  national 
securities  in  good  markets  varied  from  one-tenth  to  one-sixth 
of  their  face  value,  sometimes  falling  as  low  as  one  to  twenty. 
State  securities  were  depreciated  almost  as  badly. 

Commerce  and  business  were  in  a  languishing  condition. 
The  lack  of  a  stable  circulating  medium  was  a  contributing 
factor  but  other  conditions  were  equally  unfavorable  to  the 
conduct  of  business.  It  proved  impossible  for  the  feeble 
Confederation  government  to  re-establish  the  old  commer 
cial  relations  with  Great  Britain  and  the  British  Empire, 
whence  had  sprung  the  abundant  prosperity  of  the  colonial 
merchants  and  shipbuilders.  Spain,  the  mistress  of  Louisi 
ana  and  the  Floridas,  spurned  all  efforts  to  find  an  outlet  for 
our  inland  trade  through  opening  up  the  mouth  of  the 
Mississippi.  The  infant  manufactures  which  had  sprung 
up  during  the  war  were  being  destroyed  by  the  price-cutting 
competition  of  British  manufacturers ;  and  the  Confedera 
tion  lacked  power  to  stimulate  domestic  industries  by  a 
protective  tariff.  Strangest  of  all  to  Americans  of  today, 
commercial  intercourse  among  the  states  of  the  union  was 
embarrassed  and  impeded  by  restrictions  and  tariffs  imposed 
by  the  various  states  upon  each  other;  and  again  Congress 
was  impotent  to  take  any  measures  to  improve  the  situation. 

The  men  who  suffered  the  direct  and  immediate  effects  of 
the  derangement  of  business  and  commerce  were  the  com 
mon  people  throughout  the  states,  who  had  no  surplus  upon 
which  to  fall  back  in  times  of  financial  stringency.  In  the 
early  years  of  the  Confederation  period  some  parts  of  the 
country  had  enjoyed  a  degree  of  prosperity;  but  each  suc 
ceeding  year  brought  an  increasing  measure  of  hard  times. 
By  the  years  1785  and  1786  the  country  was  in  a  condition 
of  pronounced  depression.  Money  was  scarce,  crops  were 


MOVEMENT  FOR  THE  CONSTITUTION     187 

rotting  in  the  ground,  and  poor  people  were  reduced  to  the 
expedient  of  barter.  The  debtor  classes  everywhere  turned 
to  their  state  governments  for  relief  from  the  scarcity  of 
specie.  If  the  cause  of  their  difficulties  was  the  lack  of 
money,  then,  they  reasoned,  let  the  government  manufacture 
more  money  and  put  an  end  to  the  hardships  of  the  poor. 
However  na'ive  this  solution  may  seem  to  us  today,  we 
should  remember  that  it  was  the  natural  reaction  of  a  people 
who  found  themselves  in  desperate  economic  straits  without 
any  other  proposals  for  their  relief.  Along  with  these  paper 
money  demands  went  others  which,  in  the  language  of 
Luther  Martin  of  Maryland,  were  designed  "to  prevent  the 
wealthy  creditor  and  the  moneyed  man  from  totally  destroy 
ing  the  poor,  though  even  industrious,  debtor."  Of  this 
class  were  measures  to  suspend  the  collection  of  debts  ("stay 
laws")  and  acts  declaring  cattle  and  produce  the  equivalent 
of  money  when  offered  in  payment  of  debts. 

In  all  the  states  political  contests  began  to  take  the  form 
of  struggles  between  the  debtor  and  creditor  classes — that  is, 
between  the  small  farmers  and  mechanic  classes  on  the  one 
hand  and  the  merchant  and  capitalist  group  on  the  other. 
The  paper  money  men  carried  the  legislatures  of  seven 
states  in  elections  of  1786,  being  unsuccessful  only  in  Vir 
ginia,  Delaware,  Maryland,  Connecticut,  New  Hampshire 
and  Massachusetts.  In  New  Hampshire  several  hundred 
men,  armed  with  muskets,  swords  and  staves,  entered  Exeter 
where  the  legislature  was  sitting  and  demanded  a  release 
from  taxes  and  an  issue  of  paper  money.  The  lower  house 
wavered  but,  the  Senate  standing  firm,  the  rebels  were  routed 
the  next  day.  The  most  alarming  uprising  took  place  in 
Massachusetts,  a  revolt  that  took  six  months  to  suppress. 
The  adjournment  of  the  state  legislature  in  July,  1786,  with 
out  authorizing  any  measures  of  relief  for  debtors  led  to 
mob  demonstrations  which  prevented  the  courts  from  sitting 


i88  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

in  several  of  the  larger  districts.  Encouraged  by  these  suc 
cesses,  a  motley  army  of  insurgents  formed  under  the  leader 
ship  of  Daniel  Shays,  a  veteran  of  Bunker  Hill,  and  they  set 
forth  to  plunder  the  national  arsenal  at  Springfield  as  pre 
paratory  to  further  measures.  As  the  legislature  was  not  in 
session  and  there  were  no  funds  to  pay  the  state  troops,  a 
number  of  wealthy  gentlemen  loaned  the  necessary  funds 
for  this  purpose;  and  prompt  action  on  the  part  of  General 
Lincoln  prevented  the  breaking  out  of  a  civil  war. 

Echoes  of  the  Shays  uprising  rang  throughout  the  coun 
try.  What  had  occurred  in  Massachusetts  might  easily  be 
repeated,  with  more  disastrous  results,  in  other  states. 
Moreover,  the  troubles  in  Massachusetts  had  been  accom 
panied  by  the  enunciation  of  doctrines  in  some  quarters  that 
far  outran  paper  money  vagaries.  Mass  meetings  in  various 
towns  and  counties  had  broached  the  doctrines  that  taxation 
ought  to  be  eliminated  as  an  unnecessary  burden,  and  that 
all  property  should  be  held  in  common  since  all  had  made 
sacrifices  to  save  it  from  England.  The  very  foundations  of 
society  seemed  threatened.  Washington,  who  cannot  be 
regarded  as  an  alarmist,  expressed  the  thought  of  many 
responsible  and  conservative  people  when  he  wrote :  "There 
are  combustibles  in  every  State  which  a  spark  might  set  fire 
to.  ...  I  feel  .  .  .  infinitely  more  than  I  can  express  to 
you,  for  the  disorders  which  have  arisen  in  these  States. 
Good  God !  Who,  besides  a  Tory,  could  have  foreseen,  or  a 
Briton,  predicted  them?" 

ii 

The  instability  and  tumult  of  the  times  drove  home  to  the 
substantial  classes  of  the  population  the  imperative  need  for 
a  stronger  form  of  national  government.  Some  of  these 
men  were  animated  by  motives  of  disinterested  patriotism, 
their  love  of  country  being  outraged  by  the  affronts  offered 


MOVEMENT  FOR  THE  CONSTITUTION    189 

America  by  foreign  nations,  in  particular  by  the  fact  that 
Great  Britain  and  Spain  continued  to  occupy  western  terri 
tory  which  had  been  ceded  to  the  United  States  by  the  treaty 
of  peace  of  1783.  Others  were  by  temperament  repelled  by 
the  radicalism  and  lawlessness  that  prevailed  under  the 
Articles  and  were  inclined  to  favor  any  movement  which 
promised  a  strong  hand  at  the  helm  of  state.  Religious  and 
racial  sympathies  were  also  an  indirect  and  not  negligible 
factor  in  consolidating  the  opposing  groups  in  their  attitude 
toward  the  Articles  of  Confederation.  But  of  all  the  motives 
that  caused  men  to  strive  for  a  more  vigorous  national 
government  the  most  potent  was  undoubtedly  the  desire  to 
re-establish  conditions  under  which  property  rights  and  con 
tracts  might  be  secure,  investments  be  safe,  and  commerce 
and  business  prosper. 

It  is  with  the  economic  aspects  of  the  movement  for  the 
Constitution  that  the  present  discussion  is  concerned  since 
this  phase  of  the  subject  has,  until  recently,  been  largely 
neglected  by  the  historians.  No  discriminating  reader  need 
feel  that  such  a  presentation  carries  with  it  the  imputation  of 
ignoble  or  unworthy  motives  to  the  Fathers  of  the  Constitu 
tion;  rather,  it  forms  an  illuminating  commentary  on  the 
fact  that  intelligent  self-interest,  whether  conscious  or  in 
stinctive,  is  one  of  the  motive  forces  of  human  progress. 
Individuals  may  indeed  have  joined  in  the  movement  with 
no  other  prompting  than  a  desire  for  personal  gain  irrespec 
tive  of  the  public  welfare ;  but  the  group  as  a  whole  un 
doubtedly  were  moved  by  the  conviction  that  the  changes 
they  advocated  would  benefit  the  nation  at  large  as  well  as 
their  own  personal  economic  station. 

Under  the  Articles  of  Confederation  men  of  substance 
and  position  found  their  property  holdings  imperiled  and  the 
gates  to  economic  advancement  closed.  Persons  who  had 
speculated  in  western  lands  and  were  holding  them  for  a  rise 


NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

found  that  their  holdings  remained  at  an  abnormally  low 
price  because  of  the  weakness  of  the  Confederation  govern 
ment,  the  lack  of  proper  military  protection  on  the  frontier, 
and  the  uncertainty  as  to  the  legal  title.  Holders  of  the 
depreciated  public  securities  could  have  no  respect  for  a 
government  which  had  not  only  failed  to  provide  for  the 
eventual  redemption  of  its  obligations  but  was  unable  even 
to  make  the  current  interest  payments.  Men  with  money  to 
lend  found  the  avenues  to  profitable  investment  blocked  by 
the  general  derangement  of  business  and  the  action  of  the 
state  legislatures  in  annulling  private  contracts  and  issuing 
worthless  paper  currency.  The  merchants,  manufacturers 
and  shipbuilders  were  likewise  affected  by  the  inability  of 
the  government  to  enact  protective  tariffs  and  navigation 
laws  or  to  secure  favorable  commercial  treaties  with  foreign 
nations.  This  general  contempt  for  the  government  was 
fully  shared  by  the  great  slave  owners  of  the  South  who 
believed  that  the  government  should  possess  adequate  power 
to  insure  the  return  of  runaway  slaves  and  to  quell  servile 
insurrections.  Indeed,  the  southern  planters  were  as  vitally 
concerned  in  maintaining  order  against  the  possibility  of 
slave  revolts  as  the  creditors  of  Massachusetts  were  in  pre 
venting  recurrences  of  Shays'  rebellion. 

The  lodestone  of  a  common  material  interest  inevitably 
drew  together  the  men  of  large  economic  interests  irrespec 
tive  of  state  boundaries  or  other  artificial  distinctions,  and 
consolidated  them  into  a  compact  group  opposed  to  the  poor 
and  the  debtor  classes.  Efforts  had  been  made  at  various 
times  to  strengthen  the  Articles  with  amendments  conferring 
commercial  and  taxation  powers  upon  Congress,  but  these 
attempts  had  all  been  defeated  by  the  requirement  that  any 
changes  must  be  accepted  by  act  of  all  the  state  legislatures. 
In  1782  the  New  York  legislature  had  proposed  a  convention 
to  revise  the  Articles,  and  the  suggestion  had  been  repeated 


MOVEMENT  FOR  THE  CONSTITUTION     191 

by  the  legislature  of  Massachusetts  three  years  later,  but 
without  effect. 

The  train  of  events  which  culminated  in  the  meeting  of 
the  Constitutional  Convention  was  inspired  and  set  in  motion 
by  men  aroused  to  action  by  the  commercial  chaos  that 
reigned  in  the  country.  In  1785  commissioners  of  Virginia 
and  Maryland  came  together  for  the  purpose  of  adjusting 
questions  involving  jurisdiction  over  the  navigation  of  the 
Potomac  River  and  Chesapeake  Bay.  It  quickly  developed 
that  the  question  of  trading  regulations  was  one  that  affected 
the  neighboring  states  as  well ;  and  Maryland  proposed  that 
Pennsylvania  and  Delaware  should  be  invited  to  participate 
in  a  subsequent  meeting.  Virginia,  however,  enlarged  the 
scope  of  the  proposed  conference  by  formally  calling  upon 
all  the  states  to  send  delegates  to  Annapolis  in  1786  to 
"consider  how  far  a  uniform  system  in  their  commercial 
relations  may  be  necessary  to  their  common  interest  and 
their  permanent  harmony." 

The  response  of  the  states  to  this  invitation  was  disap 
pointing,  for  only  five  states  were  represented  at  the  Annap 
olis  convention.  No  definite  action  affecting  commercial 
relations  could  be  taken  under  the  circumstances;  but  the 
meeting  went  on  record  in  favor  of  another  convention,  to 
be  held  in  Philadelphia  the  following  year,  to  "devise  such 
further  Provisions  as  shall  appear  to  them  necessary  to 
render  the  Constitution  of  the  Federal  Government  ade 
quate  to  the  exigencies  of  the  Union."  The  interesting 
phraseology  of  this  resolution  was  the  work  of  Alexander 
Hamilton.  The  resolution  further  provided  that  any  changes 
recommended  by  the  proposed  convention  should  be  adopted 
in  the  manner  provided  by  the  Articles  of  Confederation, 
namely,  ratification  by  the  legislatures  of  all  the  states.  The 
Confederation  Congress  ignored  the  resolution  of  this  ex*ra- 
legal  body  for  a  time;  but  when  it  became  clear  that  the 


192  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

states  were  planning  to  act  upon  it  anyway,  Congress  has 
tened  to  lend  its  sanction  to  the  gathering. 

To  what  extent  the  large  economic  interests  directed  and 
controlled  the  selection  of  delegates  to  the  Constitutional 
Convention  is  necessarily  a  matter  of  conjecture  except  as 
indirect  evidence  may  shed  light  on  the  matter.  In  every 
state  the  delegates  were  elected  by  the  legislature  and  it  is 
difficult,  if  not  impossible,  to  ascertain  what  arguments  and 
pressures  were  brought  to  bear  to  influence  the  members  in 
their  action.  According  to  John  Adams,  "The  Federal  Con 
vention  was  the  work  of  the  commercial  people  in  the  sea 
port  towns,  of  the  slave-holding  states,  of  the  officers  of  the 
revolutionary  army,  and  the  property  holders  everywhere"; 
and  this  judgment  of  a  distinguished  contemporary  is  largely 
borne  out  by  the  recent  researches  of  Dr.  Charles  A.  Beard. 

Of  the  fifty-five  members  who  attended  the  convention  at 
one  time  or  other  not  one  represented  in  his  own  personal 
economic  interests  the  small  farming  or  mechanic  classes. 
On  the  contrary  the  great  majority,  at  least  five-sixths  of  the 
membership,  were  directly  and  personally  interested  in  the 
outcome  of  their  labors  through  their  ownership  of  property, 
real  or  personal,  and  were,  to  a  greater  or  less  extent,  eco 
nomic  beneficiaries  of  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution. 
While  detailed  figures  must  necessarily  be  inexact,  it  is 
worth  noting  that  speculative  investments  in  land  were  rep 
resented  by  at  least  fourteen  members.  Public  security  in 
terests  were  extensively  represented  among  the  members  in 
sums  varying  from  negligible  amounts  up  to  more  than 
$100,000.  The  precise  number  of  public  creditors  in  the 
convention  will  probably  never  be  known,  but  the  names  of 
no  Itss  than  forty  appeared  upon  the  records  of  the  United 
States  Treasury  Department  when  Hamilton's  funding 
scheme  was  carried  into  operation  shortly  after  the  adoption 
oi  the  Constitution.  Personalty  in  the  form  of  money 


MOVEMENT  FOR  THE  CONSTITUTION     193 

loaned  at  interest  was  represented  by  at  least  twenty-four 
members.  The  mercantile,  manufacturing  and  shipping  in 
terests  had  spokesmen  in  at  least  eleven  members.  Fifteen 
or  more  members  were  slaveholders.  Thus  the  membership 
of  the  convention  consisted  not  of  political  visionaries  or 
closet  philosophers  but  of  men  of  the  world  determined, 
above  all  things  else,  to  erect  a  government  that  would  be 
effective  and  workable  from  a  practical  man's  point  of  view. 

in 

The  Constitutional  Convention  held  its  sessions  in  secret ; 
and  not  until  the  publication  of  the  official  journal  by  act  of 
Congress  in  1819  was  the  bare  record  of  its  proceedings 
divulged.  Many  more  years  passed  before  James  Madison's 
notes  on  the  debates  were  made  public.  From  these  accounts 
and  other  fragmentary  versions  of  the  convention's  activities 
the  historians  have  been  able  to  reconstruct  a  picture  of  the 
stormy  controversies  and  grudging  concessions  that  marked 
the  various  stages  of  the  framing  of  the  Constitution.  To 
quote  Professor  Max  Farrand,  the  completed  Constitution 
was  "neither  a  work  of  divine  origin,  nor  'the  greatest  work 
that  was  ever  struck  off  at  a  given  time  by  the  brain  and 
purpose  of  man,'  but  a  practical,  workable  document  .  .  . 
planned  to  meet  certain  immediate  needs  and  modified  to 
suit  the  exigencies  of  the  situation." 

The  document  contained  every  protection  which  the  inter-  • 
ests  of  the  conservative  classes  had  demanded  for  the  safe 
guarding  of  their  property  rights.     The  structure  of  the  new  J 
government  with  its  intricate  system  of  checks  and  balances  J 
was  designed  to  prevent  the  populace  from  giving  free  reini 
to  its  whims  and  passions.     Of  the  three  principal  depart- ' 
ments  of  the  government  the  qualified  voters  in  the  states 
were  permitted  to  vote  directly  for  only  one  house  of  Con 
gress;  and  ample  provision  was  made  by  which  the  will  of 


194  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

the  popular  house  might  be  defeated.  More  specifically, 
provisions  were  inserted  for  conferring  full  revenue  powers 
upon  Congress  and  for  making  the  debts  of  the  Confedera 
tion  government  an  obligation  upon  the  new  government. 
Congress  was  further  given  plenary  power  to  raise  and  sup 
port  military  and  naval  forces,  for  the  protection  of  the 
country  against  both  foreign  and  domestic  foes.  Over  for 
eign  and  interstate  commerce  Congress  was  given  substan 
tially  complete  control,  which  made  it  possible  for  the  new 
government  to  enact  protective  tariffs  and  to  prevent  the 
erection  of  tariff  barriers  between  the  states.  The  new 
government  also  received  unrestricted  powers  of  treaty- 
making  with  ample  authority  to  enforce  treaties  when  made. 
Not  less  significant  were  the  clauses  which  forbade  the 
states  to  issue  paper  currency,  or  to  make  anything  but  gold 
and  silver  legal  tender,  or  to  make  laws  impairing  the  obliga 
tion  of  contracts.  By  such  provisions  conditions  were 
assured  under  which  holders  of  public  securities  might  be 
paid  in  full,  social  disturbances  quelled,  the  western  frontier 
protected,  advantages  secured  in  dealing  with  foreign  nations, 
manufactures  fostered,  and  the  financial  follies  of  the  states 
prevented. 

But  it  was  one  thing  for  the  Philadelphia  Convention  to 
agree  upon  such  a  document  in  secret  session,  and  another 
to  secure  the  acceptance  of  these  sweeping  provisions  by  the 
country  after  public  consideration.  Technically,  the  instru 
ment  framed  by  the  Convention  was  only  a  revision  of  the 
Articles  of  Confederation,  and  hence  must  go  through  the 
regular  process  prescribed  for  alterations  and  amendments  of 
the  Confederation  government.  But  the  members  of  the 
Convention  early  recognized  the  impossibility  of  securing 
approval  by  the  legislatures  of  all  the  states;  and  so  they 
decided  to  disregard  the  existing  legal  machinery,  and  they 
put  forth  a  document  which  provided  for  its  own  method 


MOVEMENT  FOR  THE  CONSTITUTION     195 

of  ratification.  The  proposed  Constitution  declared  that  the 
states  should  signify  their  approval  through  special  conven 
tions  chosen  upon  the  express  issue,  and  when  nine  state 
conventions  had  ratified  the  instrument,  it  should  go  into 

''effect  among  the  states  so  acting.  The  whole  procedure 
was  a  departure  from  the  provisions  of  the  fundamental  law 
under  which  the  Convention  had  been  called ;  and  this  action 

j  of  the  Convention,  from  a  legal  point  of  view,  cannot  be 
regarded  otherwise  than  unlawful  and  revolutionary.  As 
one  distinguished  jurist  has  remarked,  if  such  an  act  had 
been  committed  by  Julius  or  Napoleon,  it  would  have  been 
pronounced  a  coup  d'etat. 

The  future  of  the  Constitution  now  hung  upon  the  deci 
sion  of  the  state  ratifying  conventions.  From  November, 
1787,  to  the  following  July  a  campaign  of  continental  pro 
portions  was  carried  on.  Since  the  Constitution  was  not 
submitted  to  direct  popular  ratification,  as  are  state  constitu 
tions  today,  the  best  indication  that  we  have  of  popular  senti 
ment  is  found  in  the  selection  of  delegates  to  the  state 
conventions.  But  here  allowances  must  be  made  for  the 
fact  that  perhaps  one-third  of  the  adult  white  male  popula 
tion  were  excluded  from  the  franchise  by  the  property 
qualifications  that  prevailed  in  every  state.  In  New  York 
alone  a  temporary  exception  was  made,  and  all  adult  men 
were  allowed  to  vote.  A  considerable  proportion  of  the 
qualified  voters  in  every  state  abstained  from  voting  through 
indifference  or  ignorance ;  and  in  general  it  seems  highly  . 
probable  that  not  more  than  one-fifth  or  one-fourth  of  the\/ 
adult  white  males  participated  in  the  election  of  delegates  to/ 
the  state  conventions. 

The  arguments  urged  for  and  against  ratification  were 
much  the  same  in  the  several  states ;  but  each  state  campaign 
had  its  local  peculiarities  due  to  the  special  social,  economic 
and  geographic  conditions.  In  Massachusetts  the  eastern 


196  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

counties  with  their  dominant  commercial  and  financial  in 
terests  favored  ratification,  while  the  farmers  of  the  interior, 
who  had  recruited  the  ranks  of  Shays'  army,  fought  it.  In 
Rhode  Island  wealth  and  commerce  supported  the  Constitu 
tion  but  were  outweighed  by  the  agricultural  class  who  were 
advocates  of  "cheap  money."  The  forces  opposed  to  ratifi 
cation  in  Connecticut  were  very  feeble  but  drew  their 
strength  from  those  parts  of  the  state  that  contained  the 
debtor  class  and  from  the  men  who  had  sympathized  with 
Shays'  rebellion.  The  rural  counties  of  New  York  were  in 
opposition  while  the  business  section  of  the  state  in  and  about 
New  York  City  were  ardent  ratificationists.  New  Jersey  was 
favorable  to  the  new  instrument  because  of  the  trading  re 
strictions  that  had  been  imposed  upon  her  by  New  York  and 
Pennsylvania  but  a  note  of  dissent  was  heard  from  the 
debtor  and  paper  money  regions.  In  Pennsylvania  the  mer 
chant  and  propertied  classes  united  in  supporting  the  Consti 
tution  in  face  of  the  opposition  of  the  Scotch-Irish  and 
German  radicals  of  the  backcountry,  who  had  dominated 
state  politics  since  revolutionary  times.  In  Virginia  the 
long-standing  social  and  economic  antagonism  between  east 
and  west,  between  the  great  planters  and  merchants  of  the 
tidewater  and  the  small  farmers  of  the  interior,  reappeared. 
Eighty  per  cent  of  tidewater  Virginia,  containing  the  monied 
and  commercial  interests,  supported  the  Constitution  whereas 
seventy-four  per  cent  of  the  back-country  voted  against  it. 
Much  the  same  alignment  was  found  in  the  Carolinas,  with 
the  agrarian  element  in  an  actual  majority  in  North  Carolina. 
Georgia  gave  a  speedy  endorsement  to  the  Constitution  be 
cause,  as  the  southern  frontier  state,  the  people  felt  the 
imperative  need  of  a  strong  general  government  to  assist  in 
warding  off  Indian  attacks.  West  of  the  Alleghanies  the 
people  were  a  unit  in  opposing  ratification. 

John   Marshall,  an  active   supporter  of   ratification  and 


MOVEMENT  FOR  THE  CONSTITUTION     197 

later  Chief  Justice  of  the  United  States  Supreme  Court, 
wrote  in  his  Life  of  Washington  some  years  later :  "So 
balanced  were  the  parties  in  some  of  them  [the  states]  that 
even  after  the  subject  had  been  discussed  for  a  considerable 
time,  the  fate  of  the  constitution  could  scarcely  be  conjec 
tured;  and  so  small  in  many  instances,  was  the  majority  in 
its  favor,  as  to  afford  strong  ground  for  the  opinion  that, 
had  the  influence  of  character  been  removed,  the  intrinsic 
merits  of  the  instrument  would  not  have  secured  its  adoption. 
Indeed  it  is  scarcely  to  be  doubted  that  in  some  of  the  adopt 
ing  states  a  majority  of  the  people  were  in  the  opposition^. 
In  all  of  them,  the  numerous  amendments  which  were  pro 
posed  demonstrate  the  reluctance  with  which  the  new  govern 
ment  was  accepted ;  and  that  a  dread  of  dismemberment,  not ; 
an  approbation  of  the  particular  system  under  discussion,  had 
induced  an  acquiescence  in  it." 

In  the  words  of  Woodrow  Wilson,  the  friends  of  the 
Constitution  had  on  their  side  the  tremendous  advantage  of 
"a  strong  and  intelligent  class,  possessed  of  unity  and  in 
formed  by  a  conscious  solidarity  of  material  interest."  But 
"economic  determinism"  was  not  all  to  be  found  on  this  side 
of  the  contest.  Although  the  foes  of  adoption  had  strong 
theoretical  grounds  for  fearing  a  highly  centralized  federal 
government,  they  also  had  definite  pecuniary  reasons  for  con 
demning  the  many  restrictions  imposed  upon  popular  gov 
ernment  in  general  and  upon  the  authority  of  the  state 
governments  in  particular.  It  was  Alexander  Hamilton's 
cynical  comment  that  the  new  frame  of  government  encoun 
tered  the  "opposition  of  all  men  much  in  debt,  who  will  not 
wish  to  see  a  government  established,  one  object  of  which  is 
to  restrain  the  means  of  cheating  creditors."  It  is  a  mis 
taken  notion  that  all  of  the  distinguished  men  of  the  country 
were  to  be  found  in  the  ranks  of  the  ratificationists,  for 
among  the  active  opponents  were  such  men  as  Patrick 


198  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

Henry,  Richard  Henry  Lee  and  Edmund  Randolph  of  Vir 
ginia,  Elbridge  Gerry  of  Massachusetts,  and  George  Clinton 
of  New  York.  The  last  two  later  occupied  the  office  of  vice- 
president  of  the  United  States. 

Although  the  enemies  of  ratification  were  poorly  organ 
ized,  it  appears  that  in  the  case  of  four  states — New 
Hampshire,  Massachusetts,  New  York  and  Virginia — the 
conventions  were,  at  the  time  of  their  election,  either  opposed 
to  the  Constitution  or  else  so  closely  divided  that  their  action 
was  in  doubt.  A  change  of  ten  votes  in  Massachusetts,  six 
in  New  Hampshire,  six  in  Virginia  and  two  in  New  York 
would  have  prevented  ratification  by  the  conventions  of 
those  states.  In  North  Carolina  the  Constitution  was  re 
jected  by  vote  of  the  convention;  and  the  authorities  in 
Rhode  Island  refused  to  summon  a  convention  to  consider  it. 
Both  states  failed  to  take  part  in  the  first  presidential 
election. 

On  the  basis  of  the  new  fundamental  law  the  new  national 
government  was  in  due  form  established.  The  bitter  ani 
mosities  which  had  characterized  the  struggle  over  ratifica 
tion  subsided  and  were  soon  forgotten.  All  elements  united 
in  support  of  the  Constitution  and  for  the  moment  the 
political  waters  seemed  tranquil.  But  the  underlying  eco 
nomic  and  social  conflict  could  not  be  so  easily  stilled. 
Forced  to  assume  new  forms  by  the  changed  circumstances, 
the  commercial  and  monied  interests  on  the  one  hand  and  the 
agrarian  and  debtor  interests  on  the  other  prepared  to  wage 
battle  for  the  control  of  the  new  government.  Here  we  find 
the  fundamental  explanation  of  the  rise  of  political  parties 
during  Washington's  presidency. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

The  chief  authority  on  the  economic  phases  of  the  movement  for 
the  Constitution  is  Charles  A.  Beard,  who  presented  the  results  of 


MOVEMENT  FOR  THE  CONSTITUTION    199 

his  researches  in  his  work:  An  Economic  Interpretation  of  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States  (New  York,  1913). 

Most  of  the  early  historians  dealing  with  the  movement  for  the 
Constitution  had  largely  overlooked  the  economic  conflict  involved, 
one  conspicuous  exception  being  John  Marshall  who  in  discussing 
the  matter  in  his  Life  of  George  Washington  (5  v. ;  Philadelphia, 
1804-1807)  showed  a  keen  appreciation  of  the  economic  motivation 
of  events.  John  Bach  McMaster  in  his  History  of  the'  People  of  the 
United  States  (8  v.;  New  York,  1883-1913),  vol.  i,  and  Andrew  Cun 
ningham  McLaughlin  in  his  The  Confederation  and  the  Constitution 
(in  The  American  Nation:  a  History,  vol.  10;  New  York,  1905) 
deal  with  social  and  economic  conditions  in  this  period,  but  their 
treatments  are  largely  surveys  of  outward  events. 

Progress  toward  an  economic  and  social  explanation  of  events 
began  to  be  made  with  the  appearance  of  a  notable  series  of  mono 
graphic  studies  which  had  been  worked  out  independently  of  each 
other:  James  C.  Welling' s  "The .  States'-Rights  Conflict  over  the 
Public  Lands"  in  the  Papers  of  the  American  Historical  Association 
(New  York,  1889),  vol.  iii,  pp.  167-188;  Orin  Grant  Libby's  The 
Geographical  Distribution  of  the  Vote  of  the  Thirteen  States  on  the 
Federal  Constitution,  1787-1788  (Madison,  1894);  Samuel  B.  Hard- 
ing's  The  Contest  over  the  Ratification  of  the  Federal  Constitution 
in  the  State  of  Massachusetts  (Cambridge,  1896)  ;  F.  G.  Bates's 
Rhode  Island  and  the  Formation  of  the  Union  (New  York,  1898)  ; 
William  A.  Schaper's  "Sectionalism  and  Representation  in  South 
Carolina"  in  the  Annual  Report  of  the  American  Historical  Associa 
tion  for  1900,  vol.  i,  pp.  237-463;  and  Charles  Henry  Ambler's  Sec 
tionalism  in  Virginia  from  1776  to  1861  (Chicago,  1910). 

The  appearance  of  Dr.  Beard's  volume  in  1913,  at  a  time  when 
popular  criticism  of  the  courts  was  rife,  caused  it  to  be  greeted 
with  a  storm  of  criticism  and  protest.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  his 
chief  contribution  to  the  subject  beyond  what  had  already  been  done 
lay  in  his  painstaking  analysis  of  the  economic  interests  of  the  mem 
bers  of  the  Constitutional  Convention  and  his  emphasis  upon  the 
public  security  holdings  of  members  of  the  Federal  and  state  ratify 
ing  conventions.  Perhaps  the  most  incisive  scholarly  criticism  of 
Dr.  Beard's  book  was  made  by  E.  S.  Corwin  in  the  History  Teacher's 
Magazine  for  February,  1914.  Dr.  Beard's  answer  to  his  critics  may 
be  found  in  his  Economic  Origins  of  Jeffersonian  Democracy  (New 
York,  1915),  PP-  i-9- 

The  point  of  view  set  forth  by  Dr.  Beard  has  been  generally 
accepted  by  scholars  who  have  written  on  the  Confederation  period 
since  1913;  for  example,  Allen  Johnson's  Union  and  Democracy 
(Boston,  1915),  chap,  ii;  Homer  C.  Hockett's  Western  Influences  on 
Political  Parties  to  1825  (Columbus,  1917),  PP-  27-40;  and  Frank 
Tracy  Carlton's  Organized  Labor  in  American  History  (New  York, 
1920),  pp.  45-52. 


CHAPTER  IX 

THE  SIGNIFICANCE  OF  JACKSONIAN  DEMOCRACY 

The  habit  of  the  earlier  historians  of  thinking  of  American 
history  as  a  chronicle  of  political  and  constitutional  develop 
ment  has  given  currency  to/a,  very  misleading  conception  of 
"Jacksonian  Democracy."  "/To  the  ordinary  reader  of  history 
the  phrase  refers  to  a  violent  change  in  American  govern 
ment  and  politics  effected  during  the  years  from  1829  to 
1837  by  an  irresponsible  and  erratic  military  chieftain  at  the 
head  of  the  newly  enfranchised  and  untutored  masses.  Not 
withstanding  the  changing  emphasis  of  historical  writing  in 
late  years  this  notion  has  tended  to  persist,  perhaps  through 
a  natural  desire  of  the  human  kind  to  seek  a  simple  explana 
tion  of  events  rather  than  a  complex  one,  and  perhaps  also 
because  of  our  tendency  to  picture  a  superman  or  a  malign 
genius — as  the  case  may  be — as  the  moving  force  in  historic 
changes. 

The  researches  that  have  been  conducted  into  the  life  of 
the  people  of  the  United  'States  in  the  twenties  and  the 
thirties  have  thrown  an  entirely  different  light  upon  .the 
democratic  upheaval  of  that  period.  The  great  changes  that 
occurred  are  to  be  regarded  as  a  transformation  of  American 
society  that  made  itself  manifest  not  only  in  the  sphere  of 
government  but  in  almost  every  other  phase  of  human 
thought  and  endeavor,  vjackson  himself  was  a  product, 
rather  than  the  creator,  of  the  new  democratic  spirit,  for  he 
rode  into  power  on  a  tide  of  forces  that  had  been  gathering 
strength  for  more  than  a  decade  and  which  he  had  done 

200  «' 


SIGNIFICANCE  OF  JACKSONIAN  DEMOCRACY  201 

little  or  nothing  to  bring  into  being,  ^It  will  appear  that  the 
new  democracy  was  "Jacksonian"  only  to  the  extent  that 
Jackson  stamped  the  political  phase  of  the  movement  with 
the  imprint  of  his  personality,  lending  it  certain  picturesque 
characteristics  and  dramatic  qualities. 

In  the  present  discussion  the  origins  and  development  of 
this  new  spirit  in  American  life  will  be  traced  in  the  period 
of  a  decade  or  so  before  Jackson's  elevation  to  the  presi 
dency,  as  well  -as  during  his  term  of  office ;  and  its  liberating 
and  liberalizing  effects  will  be  followed  in  the  rise  of  a  new 
society  west  of  the  Alleghanies,  in  the  development  of  a 
dynamic  labor  movement  in  the  East,  in  the  literary,  social 
and  religious  aspirations  of  the  people,  and  in  the  profound 
changes  in  political  organization  and  governmental  practice. 


The  growth  of  the  West  affords  one  vital  approach  to  an 
understanding  of  the  new  democratic  outlook  of  America. 
Reference  has  been  made  elsewhere  in  this  volume  to  the 
fact  that  in  the  first  quarter  of  the  century  the  whole  physical 
basis  of  American  life  was  changed  by  the  expansion  of  the 
American  population  across  the  Alleghanies.  In  1800  only 
one-twentieth  of  the  people  lived  west  of  the  mountains ;  but 
when  Jackson  was  inaugurated  president,  one-third  of  them 
were  to  be  found  in  that  region.  Meantime  the  population 
of  the  nation  had  increased  from  five  and  one-third  millions 
to  thirty  millions ;  so  that^the  Wejrtjn  1820,  contained  almost 
twice  as  many  people  as  the  Entire  United  States  at  the 
beginning  of  the  century.  In  the  train  of  western  migration 
there  sprang  up  mighty  frontier  commonwealths,  increasing 
the  original  number  of  states  from  thirteen  to  twenty-two. 
By  the  time  Jackson  entered  the  presidency  the  entire 
domain  east  of  the  Mississippi  river  had  been  carved  into 
states  save  only  Michigan,  Wisconsin  and  Florida,  and  be- 


202  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

yond  the  great  river  Louisiana  and  Missouri  had  won  accept 
ance  as  members  of  the  Union. 

^  All  the  conditions  of  life  iri  the  West  made  for  the  pro 
motion  of  equalitarian  ideas.  /The  democracy  of  the  frontier 
was  not  derived  from  the  reading  of  philosophical  disquisi 
tions  but  grew  out  of  the  hardy  experiences  of  the  pioneers 
in  wresting  the  land  from  savage  foe  and  the  primitive 
resistance  of  Nature.  A  man  was  deemed  a  man  if  he  could 
survive  the  struggle  for  existence,  irrespective  of  his  social 
antecedents;  and  land  was  so  abundant  that  every  man 
might  attain  a  position  of  economic  independence.  Political 
equality  was  thus  based  upon  a  real  equality.  ^It  was  a 
democracy  as  yet  without  organization,  one  that  depended 
upon  personal  leadership.  The  man  most  successful  as  an 
Indian  fighter  was  expected  to  make  the  best  judge  or  the 
best  Congressman.  It  was  a  democracy  opposed  to  an 
office-holding  class  and  moved  by  a  deep  conviction  that  any 
upstanding  man  was  competent  to  hold  any  office.  Yet  on 
clearcut  political  issues  the  people  were  independent  and 
intelligent.  Their  political  code  had  as  its  main  tenets : 
political  democracy,  equality  of  economic  opportunity,  and 
opposition  to  monopoly  and  special  privilege. 

Distinction  between  north  and  south  did  not  as  yet  exist 
in  the  trans- Alleghany  region.  The  difficulties  of  the  pio 
neer  of  the  Old  Northwest  in  hewing  a  clearing  out  of  the 
hard  woods  of  his  region  were  matched  by  the  trials  of  the 
Mississippi  pioneer  in  wrestling  with  the  pine  forests  of  the 
south. 

The  West  with  all  its  crudenesses  and  virtues  came  to 
play  a  large  part  in  American  life  in  the  twenties  and  the 
thirties,  deepening  the  channels  of  democracy  and  driving 
through  them  a  roaring  tide  that  threatened  to  inundate  the 
banks.  ^Henry  Clay  of  Kentucky,  Thomas  H.  Benton  of 
Missouri  and  Andrew  Jackson  of  Tennessee  were  all  products 


SIGNIFICANCE  OF  JACKSONIAN  DEMOCRACY  203 

of  western  conditions,  though  with  curious  variations,  and 
by  their  tremendous  energy  and  personal  gifts  they  helped 
to  impress  the  ideals  and  prejudices  of  the  frontier  upon  the 
national  government. 

The  life  of  the  westerner  was  crowded  with  the  exigencies 
of  daily  living  and  secondarily  with  the  political  problems 
which  the  necessity  for  self-government  thrust  constantly 
upon  his  attention.  He  had  as  yet  no  contribution  to  make 
to  creative  literature  or  to  the  fine  art  of  living.  The  life  of 
the  frontier  democracy  bore  the  promise  of  original  contri 
butions  but  its  expression  had  to  await  the  oncoming  of  the 
children  and  grandchildren  of  the  first  pioneers. 

ii 

While  democracy  was  working  out  its  destiny  in  the  forests 
of  the  Mississippi  valley,  the  men  left  behind  in  the  eastern 
cities  were  engaging  in  a  struggle  to  establish  conditions  of 
equality  and  social  well-being  adapted  to  their  special  cir 
cumstances.  To  understand  the  difficulties  and  oppressive 
conditions  against  which  this  movement  of  protest  was 
directed,  it  is  necessary  to  consider  the  changed  circum 
stances  of  the  life  of  the  common  man  in  the  new  industrial 
centers  of  the  East  since  the  opening  years  of  the  nineteenth 
century.  Since  the  days  of  Jefferson's  embargo,  New  Eng 
land  and  the  Middle  Atlantic  states  had  been  undergoing  a 
transformation  from  a  section  of  predominant  agricultural 
and  shipping  interests  to  a  section  increasingly  devoted  to 
manufacturing.  This  growth  of  manufacturing  marked  the 
advent  of  the  factory  system  in  American  history;  and  while 
manufacturing 'was  conducted  only  in  scattered  districts  and 
upon  a  comparatively  small  scale  as  measured  by  modern 
standards,  it  profoundly  influenced  the  lives  of  the  working 
class  immediately  concerned. 

Prior  to   the   introduction  of   the   factory   system,   such 


204  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

manufacturing  as  was  known  in  America  had  been  carried 
on  under  the  "domestic  system."  Each  employer  or  "mas 
ter"  worked  side  by  side  with  his  journeymen  and  appren 
tices,  sharing  their  hard  conditions  and  long  hours;  and 
every  workingman  expected  in  time  to  become  an  employer. 
There  was  no  sharp  division  between  capital  and  labor,  and 
no  distinct  and  permanent  laboring  class.  With  the  applica 
tion  of  machinery  to  work  that  had  hitherto  been  performed 
by  hand,  the  situation  of  the  workingman  changed  radically. 
v  Under  the  new  conditions  the  mass  of  hired  labor  shifted 
from  the  farm  and  the  village  to  the  trades  and  the  manu 
factures  in  the  towns  in  the  first  quarter  of  the  century. 
The  customary  workday  on  the  farm  from  "sun  to  sun"  or 
"dark  to  dark"  was  carried  over  into  the  factory  and  the 
trades  notwithstanding  the  greatly  altered  conditions  of 
labor,  and  women  and  children  were  employed  at  the  same 
ruinously  long  hours  as  the  men. 

An  estimate  of  the  average  workday  in  the  manufacturing 
districts  was  made  in  1839  by  James  Montgomery,  super 
intendent  of  the  York  Factories  at  Saco,  Maine,  who  calcu 
lated  that  the  day's  work  at  Lowell  averaged  a  little  more 
than  twelve  hours  the  year  around  for  six  days  a  week,  and 
that  in  many  of  the  Middle  Atlantic  and  southern  states  the 
ordinary  working  hours  approached  thirteen  a  day.  There 
is  abundant  evidence  to  show  that  these  figures  may  be 
regarded  as  a  conservative  statement  of  the  conditions  pre 
vailing  in  the  earlier  years  of  the  century.  The  Lowell 
factories  were  said  to  employ  3,800  women  and  1,200  men  in 
1833;  at  about  the  same  time  it  was  estimated  that  two- 
fifths  of  all  the  factory  workers  in  New  England  were 
children  under  sixteen  years  of  age.  Wages  had  risen  nomi 
nally,  but  since  they  had  lagged  behind  the  rise  of  prices,  the 
workingmen  could  buy  less  with  their  earnings  than  earlier. 

Factory  manufacture  tended  to  concentrate  in  cities;  and 
the  period  was  marked  by  the  rapid  growth  of  urban  popula- 


SIGNIFICANCE  OF  JACKSONIAN  DEMOCRACY  205 

tion.  In  1800  there  were  only  six  cities  in  the  nation  with  a 
population  of  eight  thousand  or  over ;  three  decades  later  the 
number  had  increased  to  twenty-six,  including  three  whose 
population  ranged  from  seventy-five  thousand  to  a  quarter 
of  a  million.  The  wage-earners,  forced  to  live  near  their 
source  of  employment,  became  congested  into  squalid  and 
unwholesome  tenements,  where  they  lived  under  conditions 
of  destitution,  disease,  vice  and  crime.  The  city  of  Lowell, 
Massachusetts,  which  in  1820  did  not  even  exist,  had  a  popu 
lation  of  over  twenty  thousand  in  1840,  collected  there 
largely  to  work  in  the  mills. 

The  pressure  of  industry  not  only  tended  to  degrade  the 
wage-earners  morally  and  physically  but  left  no  place  for  the 
education  of  the  children.  In  1825  a  committee  of  the 
Massachusetts  legislature  engaged  in  investigating  the  oppor 
tunities  of  children  for  schooling  was  able  to  discover  only 
two  towns  where  the  children  between  the  ages  of  six  and 
seventeen  worked  as  few  as  eleven  hours  of  steady  labor  a 
day;  elsewhere  the  usual  working  hours  were  twelve  and 
thirteen.  Even  when  the  time  could  be  found,  the  children 
of  the  poor  were  everywhere  excluded  from  attendance  at 
the  better  schools.  Although  the  principle  of  free,  tax- 
supported  schools  had  long  been  established  in  Massachusetts 
and  most  of  New  fengland,  public  schools  were  generally 
much  less  efficient  than  private  schools,  and  Rhode  Island 
had  no  public  educational  system  whatever.  In  such  states 
as  New  York  and  Pennsylvania,  private  schools  were  con 
ducted  for  the  children  of  the  well-to-do,  and  such  free 
schools  as  were  maintained  were  regarded  as  dispensers  of 
charity  to  paupers  with  all  the  odium  attached  thereto.  In 
1833  it  was  estimated  that  in  the  entire  country  one  million 
children  of  the  ages  from  six  to  fifteen  were  not  in  any 
school,  and  eighty  thousand  of  these  were  in  the  state  of 
New  York. 

Other  conditions  of  their  daily  life  convinced  the  laboring 


206  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

class  that  the  law  and  the  courts  bore  unequally  upon  the 
poor  and  the  rich.  The  eastern  states  were  slower  than  the 
western  in  bestowing  the  franchise  upon  the  unpropertied 
class.  Even  when  this  concession  was  reluctantly  granted, 
much  injustice  remained  in  the  operation  of  the  laws.  The 
compulsory  militia  system  permitted  the  rich  to  escape  by 
paying  a  small  fine  whereas  the  poor  man  must  serve  or  go  to 
prison.  The  debtors'  prisons  still  swallowed  thousands  of 
worthy  but  unfortunate  men.  Labor  combinations  to  raise 
wages  were  prosecuted  under  the  old  English  common  law 
as  illegal  conspiracies.  The  banking  system  of  the  times 
afforded  the  workingmen  none  of  the  advantages  of  credit 
and  frequently  caused  them  to  be  paid  in  bank  notes  of 
doubtful  value. 

The  revolt  of  labor  against  these  hard  conditions  of  life 
formed  an  integral  part  of  the  democratic  upheaval  of  Jack- 
!  son's  time.  Theoretically  the  workers  might  have  escaped 
most  of  these  hardships  by  joining  their  venturesome 
brethren  who  had  taken  up  public  land  on  the  frontier;  and 
in  fact  many  individuals  of  self-reliance  and  a  little  cash 
surplus  did  so.  But  to  the  average  mill-hand,  burdened 
with  a  family,  the  public  domain  west  of  the  Alleghanies 
seemed  inaccessible  from  distance  and  expense;  he  felt 
obliged  to  work  out  his  salvation  in  the  community  where  he 
resided  and  with  such  means  as  lay  readily  at  his  hand. 

The  first  awakening  of  American  wage-earners  occurred 
in  the  late  twenties.  Before  that  time  a  sullen  discontent 
had  shown  itself  occasionally  in  strikes  and  in  the  sporadic 
formation  of  labor  unions ;  but  the  working  class  as  a  whole 
remained  unorganized,  and  unaware  that  their  greatest  hope 
for  relief  lay  in  combined  and  aggressive  action.  About 
1825,  however,  this  fact  dawned  upon  their  consciousness 
and  they  began  to  make  use  of  their  collective  strength  for 
the  betterment  of  social  conditions.  Their  efforts  fell  in  the 


SIGNIFICANCE  OF  JACKSONIAN  DEMOCRACY  207 

two  more  or  less  related  spheres  of  industrial  and  political 
action. 

From  1825  dates  a  rapid  multiplication  of  labor  unions,  or 
"trade  associations"  as  they  were  then  called.  In  every 
large  city  the  different  trades  succeeded  in  organizing.  At 
the  outset  the  various  trade  associations  in  a  city  were  un 
connected  with  each  other ;  but  in  1827  a  movement  began  in 
Philadelphia  to  join  together  the  several  trade  associations 
into  an  effective  central  organization  of  the  wage-earners  of 
the  entire  city.  The  new  organization  was  called  the 
"Mechanics'  Union  of  Trade  Associations,"  and  its  constitu 
tion  declared  that  its  object  was  "to  avert,  if  possible,  the 
desolating  effects  which  must  inevitably  arise  from  a  depre 
ciation  of  the  intrinsic  value  of  human  labor"  and  "to  pro 
mote  equally  the  happiness,  prosperity  and  welfare  of  the 
whole  community." 

The  idea  of  central  federations  spread  to  other  cities;  so 
that  within  a  few  years  all  the  large  cities  had  similar  organi 
zations.  In  1834  occurred  the  next  logical  step  when  the 
city  federations  .came  together  in  a  national  federation.  At 
about  the  same  time  some  of  the  stronger  crafts  began  to 
organize  upon  a  national  basis,  namely  the  cordwainers,  the 
printers,  the  comb  makers,  the  carpenters  and  the  handloom 
weavers.  By  1836  it  was  estimated  that  union  membership 
in  the  seaboard  cities  of  the  North  amounted  to  three  hun 
dred  thousand. 

These  labor  organizations  sought  not  only  to  improve  con 
ditions  of  employment  through  strikes  and  other  forms  of 
industrial  action  but  they  also  directed  their  efforts  to 
effecting  reforms  of  a  broader  social  import  through  politi 
cal  action.  The  transition  to  active  political  participation 
was  natural  and  easy.  At  first  the  city  federations  pledged 
the  candidates  of  the  old  parties  "to  support  the  interests 
and  claims  of  the  Working  Classes"  in  the  city  council  and 


208  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

the  state  legislature;  but  when  these  halfway  expedients 
failed  to  obtain  results,  the  wage-earners  proceeded  to 
organize  their  own  parties  in  state  after  state.  The  first 
Working  Men's  party  appeared  in  Philadelphia  in  1828; 
New  York  followed  in  the  next  year ;  and  within  a  short 
time  Working  Men's  parties  of  varying  strength  were  to  be 
found  in  all  the  seaboard  states  north  of  Maryland.  These 
parties  enjoyecj  local  successes,  occasionally  sent  members  to 
the  state  legislatures  and  to  Congress,  and  forced  the  old 
parties  in  some  instances  to  name  candidates  favorable  to 
labor. 

The  aims  of  the  organized  labor  elements  harmonized  with 
the  new  democratic  aspirations  of  the  age  and  did  much 
toward  vitalizing  those  aspirations.  The  strikes  carried  on 
by  the  trade  associations  sought  to  increase  wages,  to  secure 
what  we  now  call  the  "closed  shop,"  and  to  shorten  the 
workday  to  ten  hours.  The  demands  of  the  labor  parties 
were  broader  in  scope,  touching  on  most  of  the  conditions 
that  made  life  arduous  for  the  less  fortunate  classes  and 
seeking  to  create  broader  opportunities  for  the  common  man. 
As  summed  up  by  the  Mechanics'  Free  Press  of  Philadelphia 
in  its  issue  of  April  16,  1831,  the  program  of  labor  com 
prised  these  leading  demands:  "Universal  education,  aboli 
tion  of  chartered  monopolies  [including  the  United  States 
Bank],  equal  taxation,  revision  or  abolition  of  the  militia 
system,  a  less  expensive  law  system,  all  officers  to  be  elected 
directly  by  the  people,  a  lien  law  for  laborers,  no  legislation 
on  religion."  The  abolition  of  imprisonment  for  debt  might 
properly  have  been  included  in  this  list. 

The  paramount  emphasis  placed  by  labor  organizations 
everywhere  upon  education  grew  out  of  the  conviction,  often 
expressed,  that  since  "our  government  is  republican,  our 
education  should  be  equally  so."  In  the  words  of  the  Phila 
delphia  Trades  Union,  nothing  less  was  demanded  than  that 


SIGNIFICANCE  OF  JACKSONIAN  DEMOCRACY  209 

"an  open  school,  and  competent  teachers,  for  every  child  in 
the  State,  from  the  lowest  branch  of  an  infant  school  to  the 
lecture  rooms  of  practical  science,  should  be  established,  and 
those  to  superintend  them  to  be  chosen  by  the  people." 
Fortunate  it  was  for  the  republic  that  at  a  time  when  the 
untutored  masses  were  receiving  the  boon  of  political 
equality  the  battering  away  of  the  organized  workingmen 
was  making  possible  the  establishment  of  popular  education. 
In  general  the  working  people  not  only  fought  against  their 
own  immediate  ills  but  as  individuals  were  in  sympathy  with 
all  the  reform  movements  of  the  period,  from  temperance 
and  the  outlawing  of  lotteries  to  the  abolition  of  capital 
punishment. 

The  labor  movement  reached  its  floodtide  while  Andrew 
Jackson  was  in  office.  Indeed,  he  could  not  have  been 
elected  president  if  the  votes  of  the  laboring  men  of  the 
Northeast  had  not  been  added  to  those  of  his  followers  in 
the  Southeast  and  the  West.  Jackson  capitalized  this  sup 
port  when  he  waged  battle  against  the  great  financial  monop 
oly,  the  United  States  Bank,  and  gave  express  recognition  to 
its  demands  when  he  established  the  ten-hour  workday  in 
the  federal  shipyards  in  1836. 

The  industrial  depression  following  the  panic  of  1837 
destroyed  most  of  the  labor  unions  and  federations ;  and  the 
strength  of  the  labor  parties  was  sapped  by  internal  dissen 
sions  and  by  the  action  of  the  Democratic  party  in  taking 
over  many  of  the  workingmen's  chief  demands.  But  this 
pioneer  labor  movement  had  already  made  a  lasting  impres 
sion  on  American  democratic  ideals  and  practice.  Jackson's 
successor,  Martin  Van  Buren,  applied  the  principle  of  the 
ten -hour  day  to  all  government  works  in  1840;  and  indeed  by 
that  date  the  shorter  workday  was  established  in  most 
mechanical  branches.  By  that  time,  also,  imprisonment  for 
debt  had  been  abolished  in  most  of  the  states ;  and  the  foun- 


210  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

dations  of  popular  education  had  been  laid.  Further  than 
this,  Miss  Helen  Sumner  has  well  said :  "though  the  Work 
ing  Men's  party  had  little  success  in  electing  its  candidates  to 
office  and  though  its  immediate  tangible  results  were  small,  it 
succeeded  in  forcing  its  measures  into  the  foreground  of 
public  attention,  and  eventually  all  the  specific  evils  of  which 
it  complained  were  abolished  and  all  its  constructive  meas 
ures  were  passed." 

in 

The  democratic  ferment  of  the  twenties  and  the  thirties 
was  also  active  in  the  intellectual  and  spiritual  life  of  the 
people.  Hidden  forces  seemed  to  be  set  free  which  em 
boldened  writers  and  thinkers  to  loftier  flights  than  had  been 
their  wont  and  gave  them  a  robust  faith  in  the  perfectibility 
of  mankind.  The  new  spirit  flowered  luxuriantly  in  the 
literature  of  the  period,  which  for  the  first  time  cast  off  its 
servile  dependence  on  England  in  literary  manners.  In  1819 
appeared  Washington  Irving's  Sketch  Book,  which  immor 
talized  the  Hudson  river  in  world  literature.  In  1821  James 
Fenimore  Cooper  published  The  Spy,  a  purely  American 
novel,  to  be  followed  two  years  later  by  The  Pioneers,  the 
first  of  the  Leathersto eking  Tales. 

The  Spy  has  been  termed  by  discerning  critics  "our  liter 
ary  Declaration  of  Independence,"  and  it  marked  the  open 
ing  of  an  era  of  a  truly  indigenous  American  literature.  The 
writers  of  the  next  quarter-century  became  definitely  "Amer 
ican"  in  their  outlook,  originality  and  subject  matter.  It 
was  in  this  period  that  John  Greenleaf  Whittier,  Oliver 
Wendell  Holmes,  James  Russell  Lowell,  Ralph  Waldo 
Emerson  and  Henry  Wadsworth  Longfellow  began  their 
literary  careers — all  of  them  men  who,  without  losing  their 
kinship  with  the  literature  of  the  world,  derived  much  of 
their  inspiration  from  their  American  environment  and  dis 
played  strong  humanitarian  sympathy  with  the  moral  unrest 


SIGNIFICANCE  OF  JACKSONIAN  DEMOCRACY  211 

of  the  times.  Out  of  this  period,  too,  came  Edgar  Allan 
Poe,  a  tragic  and  solitary  genius,  the  Ishmael  of  letters,  who 
shows  no  reflection  of  place  or  time  in  his  work  but  through 
whom  America  made  her  most  significant  contribution  to 
general  literature — the  short  story. 

The  trend  of  the  times  inspired  men  of  scholarship  to 
rewrite  the  history  of  the  republic  with  a  new  dignity  and 
with  a  purpose  to  glorify  democratic  institutions  and  deify 
the  founders  of  the  nation.  George  Bancroft  began  his 
monumental  history  of  the  United  States  in  the  thirties, 
thoroughly  imbued  with  the  belief,  as  Professor  Dunning 
has  aptly  remarked,  that  the  American  republic  represented 
"the  culmination  of  God's  wonder-working  in  the  life  of 
mankind."  Late  in  the  twenties  Jared  Sparks  took  up  his 
vast  labors  of  collecting  and  editing  historical  documents, 
taking  care  to  alter  and  embellish  such  writings  as  he  selected 
for  publication  on  the  theory  that  his  fellow  countrymen 
should  not  be  disillusioned  by  observing  the  patriot  fathers 
in  their  unguarded  moments.  Or  as  one  of  his  admirers 
put  it  in  defense  of  Sparks's  method,  he  was  resolved  to 
defeat  the  "prurient  curiosity"  of  the  public  "to  see  a  great 
man  in  dishabille." 

The  awakened  interest  in  literary  self-expression  was 
further  evidenced  by  the  establishment  of  the  first  substan 
tial  literary  periodicals  in  America  and  the  founding  of  great 
publishing  houses.  In  1815  the  North  American  Review 
made  its  appearance;  and  before  Jackson  left  the  presi 
dency,  the  New  England  Magazine  (1831),  the  Knicker 
bocker  Magazine  (1832)  and  the  Southern  Literary  Mes 
senger  (1834)  were  added  to  the  list.  D.  Appleton  started 
his  career  as  a  book  publisher  in  1831 ;  and  by  the  close  of 
the  decade  the  foundations  had  been  laid  of  the  well  known 
houses  of  Harper  &  Brothers,  J.  B.  Lippincott  &  Company, 
Little,  Brown  &  Company,  and  G.  P.  Putnam  &  Sons. 

The  liberation  of  the  American  mind  from  time-honored 


212  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

traditions  and  rigid  conventions  appeared  markedly  in  the 
ecclesiastical  revolts  and  religious  revivals  of  the  age.  In 
Lowell's  epigram,  "Protestantism  had  made  its  fortune  and 
no  longer  protested" ;  a  new  religious  spirit  better  suited  to 
the  times  was  needed.  The  stern  Calvinistic  theology,  which 
had  so  long  held  sway  in  New  England,  felt  the  first  impact 
of  the  democratic  tide.  .  Under  the  leadership  of  Channing, 
Unitarianism  was  organized  in  1815  by  dissenting  members 
of  the  Congregational  Church,  on  a  creed  opposing  the 
sombre  doctrines  of  total  depravity  and  predestination  and 
affirming  the  infinite  possibilities  of  human  development. 
The  new  system  exerted  an  influence  altogether  out  of  pro 
portion  to  the  number  of  its  adherents,  and  attained  its 
loftiest  expression  in  the  philosophic  movement  known  as 
"Transcendentalism,"  of  which  Ralph  Waldo  Emerson  was 
the  foremost  exponent.  Transcendentalism  was  a  combina 
tion  of  the  spiritual  earnestness  of  Puritanism  and  an  un- 
trammeled  individualism,  which  strove  to  emphasize  the 
dignity  and  freedom  of  the  human  spirit. 

The  spread  of  Unitarianism  throughout  New  England 
was  checked  only  by  the  work  of  men  like  Horace  Bushnell, 
who  sought  to  harmonize  the  Calvinistic  theology  of  the  old 
Congregational  system  with  the  new  precepts  of  democracy. 
Other  sects  were  experiencing  similar  difficulties  in  the 
attempt  to  keep  pace  with  the  changing  ideals  of  the  age. 
The  Quakers  were  rent  in  twain  by  the  teachings  of  Elias 
Hicks.  The  Campbells,  father  and  son,  led  a  departure  from 
the  established  Presbyterian  order.  Universalism  took  its 
rise  at  this  time;  and  in  the  West  there  occurred  a  rapid 
growth  of  the  Methodists,  Baptists  and  other  denominations 
which  were  able  to  satisfy  the  religious  cravings  of  a  people 
impatient  of  theological  hair-splitting.  The  religious  zeal  of 
the  frontiersmen  found  characteristic  expression  in  the 
democratic  camp-meeting,  where  the  revivalist  might  use  his 


SIGNIFICANCE  OF  JACKSONIAN  DEMOCRACY  213 

knowledge  of  crowd  psychology  to  arouse  his  audience  to 
ecstasies  of  religious  excitement. 

The  new  interest  in  the  well-being  of  the  masses  found 
expression  in  countless  projects  for  social  betterment.  In 
1824  began  the  first  organized  movement  against  strong 
drink.  The  use  of  intoxicants  in  the  United  States  was  well- 
nigh  universal.  Even  at  the  chief  colleges  liquor  was  openly 
sold  from  booths  on  public  days ;  and  municipal  officials  pro 
vided  free  punch  for  those  who  marched  on  a  training-day. 
On  the  dinner  tables  of  the  inns  were  to  be  found  decanters 
of  brandy  free  to  the  guests.  The  movement  began  in 
Boston  with  the  formation  of  societies  pledged  to  abstinence. 
Within  five  years  more  than  one  thousand  of  these  societies 
had  been  formed  in  all  parts  of  the  country.  By  that  time 
more  than  fifty  distilleries  had  gone  out  of  business,  and  the 
importation  of  foreign  spirits  was  greatly  reduced.  The 
movement  now  took  the  form  of  the  "Washington  societies," 
and  in  the  forties  blossomed  forth  into  a  demand  for  state 
statutes  forbidding  the  liquor  traffic  altogether. 

Other  reform  movements  found  inspiration  in  the  temper 
of  the  times.  In  the  twenties  the  woman  rights  movement 
had  its  inception.  At  first  directed  to  the  improvement  of 
female  education  and  enlarged  rights  for  married  women,  it 
speedily  broadened  its  scope  and,  in  the  forties,  extended  to 
a  demand  for  woman  suffrage.  The  anti-slavery  movement 
underwent  a  significant  change.  Surcharged  with  the  new 
democratic  spirit,  it  lost  its  former  philanthropic  and  hor 
tatory  character ;  and  in  the  hands  of  William  Lloyd  Garrison 
it  became  a  militant  crusade  for  equal  racial  rights  regardless 
of  existing  legal  and  constitutional  barriers.  The  American 
Anti-Slavery  Society  was  founded;  and  by  1840,  two  thou 
sand  centers  of  abolition  propaganda  existed  in  all  parts  of 
the  North. 

But  the  new  humanitarian  spirit  also  had  immediate  prac- 


214  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

tical  effects.  Massachusetts  now  founded  the  first  public 
hospital  for  the  insane.  Stephen  Girard  of  Philadelphia, 
who  died  in  1831,  left  the  bulk  of  his  fortune  for  the  estab 
lishment  of  the  orphan  school  that  still  bears  his  name. 
Special  schools  for  the  deaf  and  the  blind  were  instituted  in 
many  states ;  and  state  provision  for  the  separation  of  juve 
nile  delinquents  from  adult  criminals  was  begun.  The  grow 
ing  demand  for  higher  education  was  met  and  strengthened 
by  the  establishment  of  Colby,  Amherst,  Oberlin,  Kenyon, 
Mt.  Holyoke,  Randolph-Macon,  Haver  ford,  Knox,  Muskin- 
gum  and  Marietta  colleges,  of  Denison,  Tulane,  Wesleyan, 
Western  Reserve  and  New  York  universities,  and  of  Hart 
ford,  Lane  and  Union  theological  seminaries. 

Characteristic  of  the  illimitable  faith  in  humanity  were 
the  optimistic  attempts  to  establish  communistic  colonies  in 
various  parts  of  the  country  between  1820  and  1840.  Robert 
Owen,  who  had  already  attempted  to  found  a  model  indus 
trial  town  in  Scotland,  came  to  America  and  established  a 
community  at  New  Harmony,  Indiana,  where  labor  and 
property  were  to  be  in  common.  A  little  later  the  New 
England  Transcendentalists  founded  a  cooperative  society 
at  Brook  Farm,  near  Boston,  an  enterprise  which  Haw 
thorne,  one  of  the  participants,  subsequently  satirized  in  The 
Blithedale  Romance.  More  than  thirty  other  communities 
and  "phalansteries"  were  established,  some  of  which  are  still 
in  existence.  Emerson  remarked:  "Not  a  man  you  meet 
but  has  a  draft  of  a  new  community  in  his  pocket!"  Al 
though  most  of  these  experiments  turned  out  to  be  failures, 
the  fine  idealism  underlying  them  proved  to  be  a  fount  of 
inspiration  for  later  generations  of  social  reformers  in 
American  history. 

As  the  foregoing  account  suggests,  the  restlessness  of  the 
times  -had  its  fantastic  offshoots  as  well  as  its  elements  of 
permanent  value.  James  Russell  Lowell  in  his  essay  on 
Thoreau  (1865)  gives  us  his  humorous  recollections  of  these 


SIGNIFICANCE  OF  JACKSONIAN  DEMOCRACY  215 

years:  "Every  possible  form  of  intellectual  and  physical 
dyspepsia  brought  forth  its  gospel.  Bran  had  its  prophets. 
.  .  .  Plainness  of  speech  was  carried  to  a  pitch  that  would 
have  taken  away  the  breath  of  George  Fox.  .  .  .  Every 
body  had  a  mission  (with  a  capital  M)  to  attend  to  every- 
body-else's  business.  No  brain  but  had  its  private  maggot, 
which  must  have  found  pitiably  short  commons  sometimes. 
Not  a  few  impecunious  zealots  abjured  the  use  of  money 
(unless  earned  by  other  people),  professing  to  live  on  the 
internal  revenues  of  the  spirit.  Some  had  an  assurance  of 
instant  millennium  so  soon  as  hooks  and  eyes  should  be 
substituted  for  buttons.  Communities  were  established 
where  everything  was  to  be  common  but  common-sense. 
.  .  .  Many  foreign  revolutionists  out  of  work  added  to 
the  general  misunderstanding  their  contribution  of  broken 
English  in  every  most  ingenious  form  of  fracture.  All 
stood  ready  at  a  moment's  notice  to  reform  everything  but 
themselves." 

But  Lowell  was  not  willing  to  dismiss  this  ebullience  with 
a  jest.  ''There  was  a  very  solid  and  serious  kernel,  full  of 
the  most  deadly  explosiveness,"  he  added;  and  then  he  put 
his  finger  upon  the  fundamental  significance  of  the  unrest: 
"It  was  simply  a  struggle  for  fresh  air,  in  which,  if  the 
windows  could  not  be  opened,  there  was  danger  that  panes 
would  be  broken,  though  painted  with  images  of  saints  and 
martyrs.  .  .  .  There  is  only  one  thing  better  than  tradi 
tion,  and  that  is  the  original  and  eternal  life  out  of  which  all 
tradition  takes  its  rise.  It  was  this  life  which  the  reformers 
demanded,  with  more  or  less  clearness  of  consciousness  and 
expression,  life  in  politics,  life  in  literature,  life  in  religion." 
It  required  the  broad  sympathy  and  keen  insight  of  a  Lowell 
to  recognize  that  Andrew  Jackson,  James  Fenimore  Cooper, 
Ralph  Waldo  Emerson  and  William  Lloyd  Garrison,  how 
ever  differing  in  external  qualities  and  interests,  were  essen 
tially  products  of  the  same  era. 


216  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

rv 

The  irrepressible  desire  of  the  common  man  for  political 
self-expression,  to  which  Lowell  alluded,  led  to  many  radical 
changes  in  political  precept  and  practice.  A  natural  con 
comitant  was  the  liberalization  of  the  suffrage.  The  new 
western  commonwealths  came  into  the  union  as  self-con 
fessed  democracies.  With  the  exception  of  one  or  two 
states,  all  adult  white  males  were  given  the  right  to  vote ;  and 
everywhere,  too,  the  principle  was  accepted  that  representa 
tion  should  be  based  upon  population  and  not  upon  property. 
The  action  of  the  western  states  proved  to  be  a  vast  make 
weight  in  favor  of  greater  democracy  in  the  older  states, 
reinforced,  as  the  demand  was,  by  the  agitation  of  the  labor 
ing  elements  of  the  seaboard  towns.  New  York,  Massachu 
setts,  Virginia  and  other  states  proceeded  to  modify  their 
suffrage  provisions  so  as  to  admit  great  numbers  of  the 
unenfranchised  classes. 

The  presidential  campaign  of  1832  revealed  to  what  extent 
the  new  political  forces  had  gained  mastery  of  the  situation. 
The  old  method  of  nominating  presidential  candidates  by 
means  of  a  congressional  clique,  a  practice  that  had  already 
broken  down  eight  years  before,  was  now  replaced  by 
national  party  conventions,  in  which  the  rank  and  file  of  the 
party  had  representation.  All  parties  in  the  campaign  em 
ployed  the  new  device.  At  the  same  time  was  begun  the 
practice,  essentially  democratic  in  its  purpose,  of  informing 
the  public  by  means  of  a  party  platform  of  the  policies  which 
the  party  intended  to  adopt  if  successful  in  the  election. 
Even  the  organization  of  the  Anti-Masonic  party  in  this 
campaign  may  be  regarded  as  a  product  of  the  fierce  demo 
cratic  spirit  of  the  times;  it  represented  a  determination, 
however  misguided,  to  rid  America  of  what  was  thought  to 
be  a  secret  and  dangerous  influence  in  American  life. 


SIGNIFICANCE  OF  JACKSONIAN  DEMOCRACY2i; 

Changes  of  like  character  were  being  introduced  into 
state  government  and  politics.  Property  qualifications  for 
ofHceholding  were  removed.  The  governor  was  made  elec 
tive  by  the  people  instead  of  by  the  legislature  as  heretofore 
in  many  states.  The  principle  of  popular  election  was  even 
applied  to  the  judges  of  the  state  courts.  In  Connecticut 
and  Massachusetts  the  church  establishments  were  over 
thrown. 

The  choice  of  Andrew  Jackson  or  of  a  man  like  him  was 
almost  inevitable  under  the  circumstances.  The  popular 
demand  was  for  a  president  who  should  symbolize  the 
apotheosis  of  the  common  man.  No  mistake  was  made  in 
this  respect  in  the  case  of  Jackson.  He  had  been  born  in  the 
backwoods  country  of  North  Carolina,  where  he  had  passed 
his  boyhood  in  bare  poverty.  Picking  up  some  necessary 
scraps  of  knowledge  he  removed  to  the  newer  frontier  of 
Tennessee  to  practise  law.  His  public  career  began  almost 
at  once,  for  he  was  a  natural  leader  and  maintained  his 
mastery  of  men  by  pistol  or  blow,  by  vehement  assertion  or 
rude  intellectual  force,  as  the  amenities  of  the  occasion 
demanded.  i^As  president  of  the  United  States,  he  displayed 
most  of  the  virtues  and  many  of  the  defects  of  the  masses 
from  which  he  sprang.  3  The  scrambling,  punch-drinking 
mob  which  invaded  Washington  at  'the  inauguration,  crowd 
ing  and  pushing  into  the  White  House  and  tipping  over  tubs 
of  punch,  did  so  in  the  spirit  of  copartners  who  at  last  had 
gotten  an  opportunity  to  take  account  of  the  assets  of  the 
firm.  Though  this  scene  was  not  countenanced  by  Jackson, 
he  placed  his  seal  of  approval  upon  the  aspirations  of  the 
rank  and  file  when  he  introduced  the  "spoils  system"  of 
appointments.  What  could  seem  more  equitable  to  the 
primitive  democracy  of  his  day  than  the  principle  of  "rota 
tion  in  office,"  and  what  more  undemocratic  than  the  older 
conception  of  a  permanent  officeholding  gentry? 


218  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

His  democratic  instincts  again  received  full  play  in  his 
great  battle  against  the  United  States  BankA  an  institution 
controlled  by  wealthy  investors  in  England  and  the  United 
States  and  one  which  he  envisaged  as  a  money  monopoly 
dangerous  to  free  institutions.  Once  again  he  interpreted 
the  inarticulate  will  of  the  people  when  he  issued  his  flaming 
manifesto  against  South  Carolina  nullification.  Had  Con 
gress  heeded  the  advice  given  in  each  one  of  his  eight  annual 
messages,  the  Constitution  would  have  been  amended  to  pro 
vide  for  the  election  of  president  and  vice-president  by  direct 
popular  vote.  His  great  contribution  to  American  history 
was  the  establishment  of  the  principle  that  the  government 
should  be  responsive  to  the  will  of  the  masses. 

Yet  Andrew  Jackson  without  his  background  of  social 
revolt  and  humanitarian  idealism  could  not  be  understood  or 
explained.  He  was  possible  because  the  times  had  prepared 
the  way  for  his  coming  and  had  ripened  the  popular  mind  for 
his  message.  Like  Rostand's  Chantecler,  his  crowing  did 
not  summon  the  sun  of  a  new  dawn,  but  his  voice  rang  out  in 
clarion  tones  when  the  morning  light  was  breaking. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

The  facts  which  are  brought  together  in  the  foregoing  treatment 
may  be  found  scattered  through  many  secondary  works;  but  the 
vital  -relationship  of  these  facts  to  each  other  and  to  the  democratic 
upheaval  of  the  twenties  and  the  thirties  was  first  made  clear  by 
Willis  Mason  West  in  his  American  History  and  Government  (Bos 
ton,  1913),  chap.  xiii. 

The  western  elements  in  the  democratic  movement  have  been  best 
set  forth  by  Frederick  Jackson  Turner  in  his  essay,  "Contributions 
of  the  West  to  American  Democracy"  (1903)  in  his  The  Frontier 
in  American  History  (New  York,  1920),  chap,  ix;  and  in  his  volume 
Rise  of  the  New  West,  1819-1829  (in  The  American  Nation:  a 
History,  vol.  14;  New  York,  1906),  chaps,  v-viii. 

The  facts  concerning  the  pioneer  labor  movement  in  America  were 
first  set  forth  in  documentary  form  in  the  monumental  work  edited 
by  John  R.  Commons  and  four  associates  entitled  Documentary  His* 
tory  of  American  Industrial  Society  (10  v. ;  Cleveland,  1910-1911), 
of  which  vols.  v  and  vi  are  devoted  to  "Labor  Movements  from 


SIGNIFICANCE  OF  JACKSONIAN  DEMOCRACY  219 

1820  to  1840."  This  material  was  put  into  the  form  of  an  historical 
narrative  by  John  R.  Commons  and  six  other  scholars  in  the  work 
entitled  History  of  Labour  injhe  United  States  (2  v. ;  New  York, 
1918).  Vol.  i,  parts  ii  and  iii,  deal  with  the  period  from  1820  to 
1840. 

The  literary  awakening  has  been  treated  with  relation  to  its  his 
torical  background  by  William  B.  Cairns  in  his  monograph  On  the 
Development  of  American  Literature  from  1815  to  1833  with 
Especial  Reference  to  Periodicals  (Madison,  1898),  and  more  ade 
quately  by  William  J.  Long  in  his  American  Literature  (Boston, 
1013),  chaps,  iii-iv.  The  new  tendencies  in  historical  scholarship 
are  the  theme  of  John  Spencer  Bassett's  volume  The  Middle  Group 
of  American  Historians  (New  York,  1917). 

The  new  religious  trend  may  be  studied  in  the  histories  of  the 
various  denominations.  The  facts  concerning  the  Garrisonian 
abolition  movement  may  be  found  in  many  places  but  nowhere  more 
clearly  than  in  Albert  Bushnell  Hart's  Slavery  and  Abolition,  1831- 
1841  (in  The  American  Nation:  a  History,  vol.  16;  New  York, 
1906),  chaps,  xi-xviii,  xxi.  For  the  woman's  movement  in  this 
period,  see  the  Bibliographical  Note  at  the  close  of  chap,  vi  of  the 
present  volume.  The  educational  awakening  has  been  most  appreci 
atively  set  forth  with  reference  to  the  social  and  political  background 
of  the  times  by  Ellwood  P.  Cubberley  in  his  Public  Education  in 
the  United  States  (Boston,  1919),  chaps,  iv-ix. 

A  synthetic  treatment  of  the  communistic  experiments  may  be 
found  in  John  Humphrey  Noyes's  History  of  American^  Socialisms 
(Philadelphia,  1870),  and  more  briefly  in  Morris  Hillquit's  History 
of  Socialism  in  the  United  States  (New  York,  1903),  part  i.  The 
widespread  interest  in  social  reform  is  treated  from  the  standpoint 
of  transcendentalist  philosophy  by  Ralph  Waldo  Emerson  in  his 
lecture  entitled  "New  England  Reformers,"  delivered  in  1844  and 
reprinted  in  his  Complete  Works  (12  v.;  New  York,  n.  d.),  vol.  iii, 
pp.  237-270.  The  political  aspects  of  the  democratic  movement  have 
been  treated  in  an  enlightening  manner  in  M.  Ostrogorski's 
Democracy  and  the  Organization  of  Political  Parties  (2  v. ;  New 
York,  1902),  vol.  ii,  chap,  ii;  Charles  Edward  Merriam's  A  History 
of  American  Political  Theories  (New  York,  1903),  chap,  y;  and 
William  MacDonald's  Jacksonian  Democracy,  1829-1837  (in  The 
American  Nation:  a  History,  vol.  15;  New  York,  1906),  chaps,  iv, 
xiv,  xv. 

Of  the  many  biographies  of  Andrew  Jackson  the  most  recent  and 
best  is  that  by  John  Spencer  Bassett  (2  v.;  Garden  City,  1911). 


CHAPTER  X 

THE   STATE  RIGHTS  FETISH 


The  doctrine  of  state  rights  is  one  that  is  intimately  asso 
ciated  with  American  history,  especially  with  certain  move 
ments  and  controversies  that  fell  in  the  period  before  the 
Civil  War.  Writers  and  teachers  of  American  history  are 
accustomed  to  use  the  phrase  as  if  it  furnished  a  fundamental 
explanation  of  the  motivation  of  events.  That  this  is  far 
from  true  any  detailed  examination  of  American  history 
should  make  apparent ;  and  indeed  the  expression  itself  has 
borne  different  meanings  at  different  epochs  or  as  understood 
by  different  leaders  in  the  same  epoch.  At  one  period  of 
our  history  the  foremost  exponents  of  the  state  rights  theory 
were  believers  in  nullification.  At  another  time  the  doctrine 
was  epitomized  in  the  claim  of  the  right  of  secession.  In 
either  of  these  forms  the  doctrine  might  more  properly  be 
called  "state  sovereignty."  Vet  again,  those  who  promul 
gated  state  rights  views  had  nothing  more  in  contemplation 
than  a  peaceful  political  purpose  to  induce  the  federal  gov 
ernment  to  allow  freer  play  for  the  authority  of  the  state 
governments. 

These  contrasting  schools  of  state  rights  opinion  did  not 
essentially  differ  with  each  other  as  to  fundamental  purpose 
but,  as  we  shall  see,  they  held  different  views  as  to  a  practical 
program  of  achieving  results.  The  kernel  of  all  forms  of 
the  state  rights  doctrine  was  the  desire  of  the  state  govern 
ments  to  enhance  their  power  or,  at  least,  to  resist  encroach- 

220 


THE  STATE  RIGHTS  FETISH  22t 

ments  of  the  federal  authority.  Since  the  respective  spheres 
of  power  of  state  and  nation  are  defined  in  the  federal 
Constitution,  advocates  of  state  rights,  however  they  may 
have  differed  among  themselves,  all  joined  in  professing  a 
belief  in  a  "strict  construction"  of  that  instrument.  They 
held  that  the  powers  granted  to  the  federal  governmenTlii 
the  Constitution  should  be  understood  in  the  most  literal 
sense  and,  in  the  language  of  the  tenth  amendment,  that 
..the  powers  "not  delegated  to  the  United  States  by  the  Con 
stitution,  nor  prohibited  by  it  to  the  States,"  were  "reserved 
to  the  States  respectively,  or  to  the  people."  * 

The  origin  of  the  great  controversy  is  to  be  found  in  the 
Federal  Constitutional  Convention.  In  a  less  direct  sense, 
the  state  rights  question  is  not  to  be  regarded  as  an  American 
problem  at  all,  but  rather  as  the  inevitable  fruit  of  any  at 
tempt  to  reconcile  centralized  federative  control  with  local 
self-government.  In  this  sense,  the  Revolutionary  War 
may  be  regarded  as  a  victory  for  state  rights,  or  colonial 
self-government,  carried  to  the  point  of  secession;  and  the 
Articles  of  Confederation  were  a  codification  of  that  victory 
in  the  guise  of  a  formal  constitution  under  which  the  separate 
states  became  freer  of  their  own  central  government  than 
they  as  colonies  had  desired  to  be  of  the  British  home 
government.  The  chief  task  that  confronted  the  leaders  of 
the  Federal  Constitutional  Convention  was,  in  its  essence, 
the  same  that  the  British  government  had  failed  to  solve 
a  dozen  years  before:  the  problem  of  harmonizing  central 
unified  control  with  state  sovereignty. 

The  solution  was  worked  out  in  the  Constitutional  Con 
vention  by  men  of  practical  vision  who  were  resolved  to 

1  It  is  interesting  to  note  that  the  state-rights  strict  constructionists  were 
always  one-sided  in  the  application  of  their  doctrine,  and  were  never  willing 
to  apply  strict  construction  as  a  criterion  when  denning  the  rights  reserved  to 
the  states.  From  this  point  of  view  those  who  are  known  in  history  as  the 
broad  constructionists,  the  men  who  desired  to  preserve  or  enlarge  the  powers 
of  the  federal  government,  may  be  regarded  as  strict  constructionists  in  respect 
to  state  authority. 


222  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

make  the  national  government  a  going  concern  at  whatever 
cost  to  preconceived  theories  of  state  sovereignty.  The 
constitution  they  produced  magnificently  justified  their 
method;  but  from  the  standpoint  of  pure  theory  the  docu 
ment  necessarily  contained  compromises,  concealments  and 
inconsistencies  which  were  eagerly  seized  upon  by  later 
disputants  to  justify  their  peculiar  views  of  the  nature  of 
the  federal  system  that  had  been  created.  Leaders  of  both 
the  nationalist  and  state  rights  schools  could  find  aid  and 
comfort  in  the  wording  of  the  Constitution;  but  neither 
group  could  make  out  an  impregnable  case  for  its  manner 
of  thinking  without  ignoring  or  explaining  away  phrases 
and  implications  which  supported  the  contrary  position. 

Readers  of  the  older  American  histories  are  likely  to  get 
the  impression  that  the  state  rights  theory,  like  cotton  and 
slavery,  was  a  peculiar  product  of  the  South,  and  that  in  the 
political  field  it  has  dominated  the  beliefs  and  policies  of  the 
Democratic  party.  On  the  basis  of  these  assumptions  the 
history  of  the  United  States  prior  to  the  Civil  War,  and  to 
some  extent  since,  is  pictured  as  a  great  struggle  between 
two  schools  of  governmental  theory,  the  Democrats,  and  the 
South  generally,  being  wedded  by  temperament  and  intellect 
to  the  one  view,  and  the  rival  party  supported  by  a  majority 
of  the  northerners  having  a  psychological  affinity  for  the 
other.  There  is,  of  course,  a  measure  of  truth  in  all  this; 
but  the  picture  as  a  whole  is  in  wrong  perspective  and  blurs 
the  essential  facts. 

It  is  the  purpose  of  the  present  discussion  to  show,  as 
Alexander  Johnston  has  so  well  said,  that  "almost  every 
state  in  the  Union  in  turn  declared  its  own  'sovereignty/ 
and  denounced  as  almost  treasonable  similar  declarations  in 
other  cases  by  other  states,"  and,  secondly,  that  political 
parties  have  been  almost  as  variable  in  this  respect  as  the 
states.  Throughout  the  discussion  it  will  appear  that  eco- 


THE  STATE  RIGHTS  FETISH  223 

nomic  interest  or  some  other  local  advantage  has  usually 
determined  the  attitude  of  states  and  parties  toward  questions 
of  constitutional  construction. 

ii 

The  first  notable  attempt  by  any  state  legislatures  to 
formulate  the  state  rights  doctrine  appeared  in  the  well- 
known  Virginia  and  Kentucky  resolutions  of  1798  and  1799. 
We  know  now  that  these  resolutions  had  a  political  animus 
behind  them.  Drafted  respectively  by  Madison  and  Jeffer 
son,  they  were  adopted  by  the  legislatures  of  Virginia  and 
Kentucky  as  a  spectacular  protest  against  the  action  of  the 
Federalists  in  Congress  in  passing  the  Alien  and  Sedition 
Acts  and  other  laws  which  seemed  to  contravene  a  plain 
reading  of  the  Constitution.  Far  from  being  carefully 
reasoned  documents,  these  resolutions  resorted  to  extrava 
gant  language  in  much  the  same  manner  as  modern  political 
platforms  and  for  exactly  the  same  purpose:  the  arousing 
of  popular  indignation  against  the  party  in  power. 

By  both  states  the  Union  was  pronounced  a  compact 
formed  by  sovereign  states  which  retained  the  right  to  decide 
when  the  federal  government  was  acting  beyond  its  consti 
tutional  powers.  The  Virginia  resolutions  asserted,  some 
what  vaguely,  that  when,  as  in  the  present  case,  the  federal 
government  was  guilty  of  exceeding  its  authority,  the  states 
had  the  right  "to  interpose  for  arresting  the  progress  of  the 
evil" ;  and  the  Kentucky  legislature,  while  bravely  resolving 
that  nullification  was  "the  rightful  remedy,"  ended  up  rather 
lamely  by  declaring  that  against  the  acts  objected  to  "this 
Commonwealth  does  now  enter  ...  its  solemn  protest." 
In  view  of  the  next  turning  in  the  history  of  the  state  rights 
theory,  it  is  interesting  to  note  that  the  New  England  legis 
latures,  controlled  by  Federalist  opinion,  were  a  unit  in 
decrying  the  dangerous  tendency  of  the  Virginia  and  Ken- 


224  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

tucky  resolutions  and  in  asserting  that  the  power  of  passing 
upon  the  constitutionality  of  acts  of  Congress  was  vested 
by  the  Constitution  exclusively  in  the  federal  courts. 

The  second  important  development  of  the  state  rights 
doctrine  grew  out  of  very  different  circumstances.  In 
December,  1807,  the  Republican  party  in  Congress  under  the 
leadership  of  President  Jefferson  passed  the  embargo  as  an 
act  of  retaliation  against  British  and  French  interferences 
with  American  trade  during  the  Napoleonic  wars.  New 
England  was  the  center  of  the  shipbuilding  industry  and  the 
chief  carrier  of  world  commerce  at  this  time,  and  the  people 
there  bitterly  resented  a  regulation  which  meant  the  total 
destruction  of  their  chief  source  of  wealth.  They  therefore 
embarked  upon  a  career  of  obstruction  and  opposition  to 
the  federal  government,  that  was  to  last  far  into  the  war 
that  the  United  States  waged  with  Great  Britain  from  1812 
to  1815. 

Forced  to  resort  to  minority  tactics,  the  New  England 
leaders  found  their  most  effective  weapon  in  the  adoption  of 
the  state  rights  doctrine  which  Jefferson  and  Madison  had 
sponsored  a  few  years  earlier.  In  February,  1809,  the 
Massachusetts  legislature  resolved  that  the  embargo  measures 
were,  "in  many  respects,  unjust,  oppressive  and  unconsti 
tutional,  and  not  legally  binding  on  the  citizens  of  this  state," 
though  the  citizens  were  counselled  "to  abstain  from  forcible 
resistance,  and  to  apply  for  their  remedy  in  a  peaceable 
manner  to  the  laws  of  the  commonwealth."  The  Connecticut 
legislature  resolved  in  a  similar  spirit  that  it  would  not  "assist 
or  concur  in  giving  effect  to  the  .  .  .  unconstitutional  act, 
passed  to  enforce  the  Embargo." 

With  the  outbreak  of  the  war  with  Great  Britain,  the 
New  England  leaders  found  new  grounds  for  disaffection. 
One  cause  for  complaint  was  the  insistence  of  the  United 
States  government  that  the  state  militia  should  be  called  into 


THE  STATE  RIGHTS  FETISH  225 

service  under  federal  officers.  The  Connecticut  legislature 
solemnly  resolved  that  "the  state  of  Connecticut  is  a  FREE 
SOVEREIGN  and  INDEPENDENT  state;  that  the 
United  States  are  a  confederacy  of  states;  that  we  are  a 
confederated  and  not  a  consolidated  republic,"  and  that  the 
demand  of  the  War  Department  was  in  plain  violation  of 
the  Constitution.  When  a  conscription  bill  was  proposed  in 
Congress,  the  Connecticut  legislature  denounced  it  in  Octo 
ber,  1814,  as  subversive  of  the  "freedom,  sovereignty  and 
independence"  of  the  state  and  "inconsistent  with  the  prin 
ciples  of  the  constitution  of  the  United  States."  The  "free, 
sovereign  and  independent  State  of  Massachusetts"  gave  vent 
to  its  disapproval  in  a  succession  of  resolutions  centering 
about  the  thought :  "Whenever  the  national  compact  is  vio 
lated,  .  .  .  this  legislature  is  bound  to  interpose  its  power, 
and  wrest  from  the  oppressor  his  victim";  and  it  recalled 
that  "This  is  the  spirit  of  our  Union"  as  "explained  by  the 
very  man  [President  Madison],  who  now  sets  at  defiance 
all  the  principles  of  his  early  political  life." 

The  festering  discontent  reached  its  climax  in  the  Hartford 
Convention  of  December,  1814,  made  up  of  official  delegates 
from  Massachusetts,  Connecticut  and  Rhode  Island,  and  of 
representatives  from  local  conventions  in  New  Hampshire 
and  Vermont.  We  do  not  know  to  this  day  what  occurred 
behind  the  closed  doors  of  the  convention  hall  although  there 
is  no  doubt  that  talk  of  secession  ran  rife.  Soberer  counsels 
won  the  day,  however.  Resolutions  were  adopted  repeating 
the  gist  of  the  Virginia  resolutions  of  1798  and  demanding 
seven  amendments  to  the  federal  Constitution  which,  if 
adopted,  would  remove  all  of  the  New  England  grievances. 
"If  the  Union  be  destined  to  dissolution,"  the  convention 
announced  to  the  world,  "...  it  should,  if  possible,  be  the 
work  of  peaceable  times,  and  deliberate  consent." 

The  geographical  center  of  the  state  rights  agitation  shifted 


226  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

once  more  with  the  renewal  of  the  controversy  over  the 
United  States  Bank.  When  a  bill  for  re-charter  of  the  First 
Bank  was  pending  in  Congress,  the  Pennsylvania  legislature 
in  January,  1811,  announced  its  conviction  that  the  proposed 
measure  was  unwarranted  by  the  Constitution,  and  asserted 
that  the  Constitution,  "being  to  all  intents  and  purposes  a 
treaty  between  sovereign  states,  the  general  government  by 
this  treaty  was  not  constituted  the  exclusive  or  final  judge 
of  the  powers  it  was  to  exercise."  The  legislature  of  Vir 
ginia  agreed  that  the  passage  of  the  bill  "would  be  not  only 
unconstitutional,  but  a  dangerous  encroachment  on  the 
sovereignty  of  the  states." 

When  the  Second  United  States  Bank  was  finally  estab 
lished  in  1816,  hostility  to  the  bank  reappeared,  being  aggra 
vated  by  the  hard  times  attending  the  crisis  of  1819  and  by 
the  opposition  of  the  state  banks.  In  several  states  the 
legislatures  levied  heavy  taxes  on  the  branches  of  the  United 
States  Bank  within  their  boundaries ;  but  the  Supreme  Court 
in  the  McCulloch  v.  Maryland  decision  in  1819  sustained 
the  constitutionality  of  the  bank  and  its  exemption  from  state 
taxation.  Nothing  dismayed  by  this  turn  of  events,  the 
General  Assembly  of  Ohio  reaffirmed  its  right  to  tax  the 
branch  banks,  endorsed  the  Virginia  and  Kentucky  resolu 
tions  of  1798  and  1800,  and  denounced  the  dogma  that  the 
powers  of  "sovereign  States"  may  be  determined  and  settled 
by  the  United  States  Supreme  Court. 

The  federal  government  found  an  outspoken  friend  in 
South  Carolina  and  a  somewhat  unexpected  defender  in 
Massachusetts.  In  resolutions  of  1821  and  1822  both  states 
asserted  the  full  right  of  Congress  to  enact  laws  establishing 
a  national  bank  with  branches  in  the  several  states,  and 
Massachusetts,  with  an  odor  of  self -righteousness,  explicitly 
championed  the  right  of  the  United  States  Supreme  Court  to 
settle  all  questions  involving  the  constitutionality  of  legisla- 


THE  STATE  RIGHTS  FETISH  227 

tion.  Even  Pennsylvania,  which  had  pronounced  the  bank 
unconstitutional  twenty  years  before,  rallied  to  its  support 
in  1831,  and  requested  Congress  to  renew  its  charter! 

Georgia  was  the  next  state  to  lift  the  standard  of  state 
rights.  Her  interest  in  the  matter  was  the  outgrowth  of  a 
long  controversy  with  certain  Indian  tribes  within  her 
boundaries,  in  which  the  United  States  government  was 
acting  the  part  of  protector  of  the  Indians.  In  December, 
1827,  the  legislature  officially  recorded  its  approval  of  a 
statement  made  by  Governor  Troup  to  the  Secretary  of  War, 
that  he  felt  it  "to  be  his  duty  to  resist  to  the  utmost  any 
military  attack  which  the  Government  of  the  United  States 
shall  think  proper  to  make  on  the  territory,  the  People  or 
the  sovereignty  of  Georgia."  When  the  United  States 
Supreme  Court  handed  down  a  decision  favorable  to  the 
Indians,  the  legislature  passed  resolutions  enjoining  the 
officers  of  the  state  to  ignore  "every  mandate  and  process" 
issued  by  the  court,  and  requiring  the  governor  to  defend 
the  rights  of  the  state  "with  all  the  force  and  means  placed 
at  his  command  by  the  Constitution  and  laws  of  this  state." 

The  action  of  Georgia  aroused  the  attention  of  other  states 
whose  Indian  problems  had  long  since  been  settled.  The 
legislatures  of  Massachusetts  and  Pennsylvania  passed  reso 
lutions  in  support  of  the  supremacy  and  integrity  of  the 
federal  judiciary;  and  Connecticut,  erstwhile  defender  of 
the  compact  theory,  resolved  in  1831  that  "we  regard  the 
judicial  department  ...  as  sacred  in  its  origin,  and  invalu 
able  in  its  purposes  and  objects."  It  must  have  been  out 
of  the  fullness  of  her  experience  that  she  asserted  that  the 
legislatures  "of  the  several  states  partake  too  readily  of  local 
jealousies  and  excitements  to  be  entrusted  with  the  final 
determination  of  questions  involving  the  validity  of  the 
federal  laws." 

While  the  Georgia  Indian  controversy  was  being  aired, 


228  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

a  new  movement  for  state  rights  was  gathering  strength  in 
a  different  quarter  of  the  Union.  The  sentiment  of  South 
Carolina  statesmen  had  hitherto  been  distinctly  nationalistic ; 
and  when  the  legislature  was  urged  in  1820  to  denounce  the 
protective  system  as  unconstitutional,  resolutions  were 
adopted  by  the  House  of  Representatives  reprobating  "the 
practice,  unfortunately  become  too  common,  of  arraying 
upon  questions  of  national  policy,  the  states  as  distinct  and 
independent  sovereignties  .  .  .  with  a  view  to  exercise  a 
control  over  the  general  government." 

It  was  the  tariff  question,  however,  that  was  soon  to  cause 
the  planters  of  South  Carolina  the  same  bitterness  of  spirit 
that  the  merchants  of  New  England  had  felt  toward  the 
embargo.  A  high  tariff  to  foster  manufacturing  could  be 
of  no  possible  assistance  to  the  South,  and  indeed  damaged 
that  section  by  greatly  raising  the  prices  of  the  manufactures 
they  must  buy.  So  by  December,  1825,  the  South  Carolina 
legislature  made  the  expedient  discovery  that  a  protective 
tariff  was  "an  unconstitutional  exercise  of  power."  In  a 
like  category,  it  placed  federal  aid  to  internal  improvements, 
a  measure  which  was  chiefly  beneficial  to  northern  merchants 
seeking  to  broaden  their  domestic  markets.  In  the  next  few 
years  South  Carolina  was  joined  in  her  new  convictions  by 
the  nearby  states  of  Virginia,  Georgia,  Alabama  and 
Mississippi. 

But  South  Carolina  soon  began  to  press  forward  to 
positions  and  views  in  advance  of  those  of  her  sister  states 
of  the  South.  Having  arrived  at  the  opinion  in  1827  that 
the  Constitution  was  a  compact  of  the  states  "as  separate, 
independent  sovereignties,"  the  South  Carolina  legislature  in 
the  next  year  adopted  the  famous  "Exposition,"  written  by 
John  C.  Calhoun,  which  explicitly  announced  the  right  of 
a  state  to  nullify  federal  laws  that  were  regarded  by  the  state 
as  unconstitutional.  A  few  years  later,  in  November,  1832, 


THE  STATE  RIGHTS  FETISH  229 

South  Carolina  put  her  threat  into  execution  through  the 
passage  of  an  "Ordinance  of  Nullification"  by  a  state  con 
vention  expressly  assembled  for  that  purpose.  In  her  oppo 
sition  to  the  protective  tariff  South  Carolina  had  carried  her 
state  rights  views  to  lengths  that  had  never  been  more  than 
hinted  at  by  any  of  her  predecessors.  When  Congress 
granted  her  a  measure  of  relief  through  the  passage  of  the 
compromise  tariff  of  1833,  the  South  Carolina  convention 
solemnly  repealed  the  Ordinance  of  Nullification  and  adopted 
a  new  ordinance  nullifying  the  so-called  Force  Bill  of 
Congress. 

The  leaders  of  South  Carolina  in  this  crisis  had  at  their 
tongues'  end  the  earlier  history  of  the  state  rights  doctrine  in 
America,  but  they  sought  in  vain  for  friends  and  defenders 
where  they  had  every  right  to  expect  them.  In  the  first 
stages  of  the  controversy,  Ohio  and  Pennsylvania,  both 
former  expounders  of  the  state  rights  position,  expressed 
their  belief  that  the  tariff  was  entirely  constitutional.  Even 
those  states  of  the  South  which  had  earlier  declared  a  belief 
in  the  unconstitutionally  of  the  tariff  system  were  not 
willing  to  follow  the  logic  of  South  Carolina  into  nullification. 
The  Virginia  legislature  officially  resolved  that  the  Virginia 
resolutions  of  1798  did  not  sustain  the  nullification  pro 
ceedings  in  South  Carolina.  The  Georgia  legislature,  which 
only  recently  had  defied  the  Supreme  Court  and  the  federal 
government  in  her  dispute  over  the  Indian  lands,  could  now 
declare  with  good  conscience :  "we  abhor  the  doctrine  of 
Nullification  as  neither  a  peaceful,  nor  a  constitutional 
remedy,  but,  on  the  contrary,  as  tending  to  civil  commotion 
and  disunion."  The  resolutions  of  Alabama  and  North 
Carolina  were  no  less  emphatic,  Mississippi  adding,  with 
myopic  vision  into  the  future,  "we  stand  firmly  resolved, 
...  in  all  events  and  at  every  hazard,  to  sustain"  the 
president  in  "preserving  the  integrity  of  the  Union — that 


230  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

Union,  whose  value  we  will  never  stop  to  calculate — holding 
it,  as  our  fathers  held  it,  precious  above  all  price."  Perhaps 
the  most  unkindest  cut  of  all  was  administered  by  the  Ken 
tucky  legislature,  which  in  1799  had  first  announced  the  right 
of  nullification.  The  Kentucky  resolutions  proclaimed  the 
unqualified  right  of  the  majority  to  govern  through  laws  of 
Congress,  and  denied  that  either  South  Carolina  or  any  other 
state  had  the  constitutional  right  to  defeat  the  will  of  the 
majority. 

From  the  close  of  the  nullification  episode  of  1832-1833 
to  the  outbreak  of  the  Civil  War,  the  agitation  of  state  rights 
was  intimately  connected  with  a  new  issue  of  growing 
importance,  the  slavery  question,  and  the  principal  form  as 
sumed  by  the  doctrine  was  that  of  the  right  of  secession.  The 
pro-slavery  forces  sought  refuge  in  the  state  rights  position 
as  a  shield  against  federal  interference  with  pro-slavery 
projects;  and,  as  we  shall  see,  many  southern  states  which 
had  hitherto  been  hostile  or  apathetic  to  the  doctrine  as  a 
philosophical  abstraction  became  its  foremost  advocates.  As 
a  natural  consequence,  anti-slavery  legislatures  in  the  North 
were  led  to  lay  great  stress  on  the  national  character  of  the 
Union  and  the  broad  powers  of  the  general  government  in 
dealing  with  slavery.  Nevertheless,  it  is  significant  to  note 
that  when  it  served  anti-slavery  purposes  better  to  lapse  into 
state  rights  dialectic,  northern  legislatures  did  not  hesitate 
to  be  inconsistent. 

Thus  the  legislature  of  Massachusetts  resolved  in  1844  that 
"the  project  of  the  annexation  of  Texas,"  if  carried  through 
to  success  by  the  pro-slavery  forces,  "may  tend  to  drive  these 
states  into  a  dissolution  of  the  union" ;  and  when,  notwith 
standing,  annexation  was  accomplished  in  the  following 
year,  the  legislature  resolved  that  "Massachusetts  hereby 
refuses  to  acknowledge  the  act  ...  authorizing  the  admis 
sion  of  Texas,  as  a  legal  act,  in  any  way  binding  her  from 


THE  STATE  RIGHTS  FETISH  231 

using  her  utmost  exertions  in  cooperation  with  other  States, 
by  every  lawful  and  constitutional  measure,  to  annul  its 
conditions,  and  defeat  its  accomplishment."  Vermont,  Ohio 
and  Connecticut  likewise  protested  that  the  federal  govern 
ment  had  exceeded  its  constitutional  powers  in  annexing 
Texas  as  a  state.  With  the  outbreak  of  the  Mexican  War, 
the  Massachusetts  legislature  denounced  it  as  a  pro-slavery 
war  of  conquest,  and  in  1847  resolved  that  the  struggle  was 
"unjust  and  unconstitutional  in  its  origin  and  character" 
and  that  all  good  citizens  should  unite  to  stop  it. 

The  New  Jersey  legislature  found  occasion  as  late  as  1852 
to  declare,  in  solemn  resolutions,  that  the  Constitution  was 
"a  compact  between  the  several  States"  and  that  the  general 
government  had  been  granted  by  the  sovereign  states  only 
limited  powers.  The  passage  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act  of 
1850  called  forth  fresh  evidences  of  latent  state  rights  feeling 
in  the  North.  Many  of  the  legislatures  of  that  section 
passed  so-called  Personal  Liberty  Laws,  designed  to  obstruct 
the  recovery  of  fugitive  slaves  under  the  federal  act.  "They 
were  dangerously  near  the  nullification  of  a  United  States 
law,"  James  Ford  Rhodes  tells  us.  In  1855  and  1856,  reso 
lutions  were  passed  by  the  legislatures  of  Massachusetts  and 
Ohio  pronouncing  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act  unwarranted  by 
the  Constitution.  In  Wisconsin  the  state  Supreme  Court 
held  the  law  to  be  "unconstitutional  and  void";  and  when 
the  federal  Supreme  Court  reversed  the  decision,  the  state 
legislature  resolved  in  1859,  on  the  verge  of  the  war  to 
preserve  the  Union,  that  the  several  states  which  had  formed 
the  federal  compact,  being  "sovereign  and  independent,"  had 
"the  unquestionable  right  to  judge  of  its  infractions"  and 
to  resort  to  "positive  defiance"  of  all  unauthorized  acts  of 
the  general  government. 

The  authority  of  the  federal  judiciary  was  also  assailed 
from  many  quarters  when  the  Supreme  Court  handed  down 


232  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

the  Dred  Scott  decision  opening  the  federal  territories  to 
slavery.  Ohio  and  other  northern  states  lost  no  time  in 
declaring  the  decision  to  be  "repugnant  to  the  plain  provi 
sions  of  the  Constitution" ;  and  the  Maine  legislature  joined 
Ohio  in  calling  for  a  reorganization  of  the  court. 

Notwithstanding  these  occasional  instances  of  reversion 
to  type  on  the  part  of  northern  states,  the  state  rights  theory 
received  its  most  important  development  in  this  period  at  the 
hands  of  the  southern  legislatures.  In  the  struggle  over  the 
tariff,  South  Carolina  had  developed  the  theory  and  technique 
of  nullification  to  a  high  point  of  perfection,  only  to  find, 
on  trying  out  the  method,  that  it  was  certain  to  be  ineffective 
in  practice  unless  accompanied  with  the  tacit  concurrence  of 
the  federal  government.  The  incident  had  shown  conclu 
sively  that,  in  a  test  of  force, 'a  resolute  federal  government 
would  always  be  able  to  enforce  United  States  law  in  a 
nullifying  state.  The  implications  of  the  compact  theory 
readily  suggested  a  logical  substitute  for  nullification  in 
r  secession ;  and  this  measure  henceforth  became  the  great 
I  shibboleth  of  the  southern  state  rights  school. 
""Already  in  1831  the  South  Carolina  legislature  had  an 
nounced  that  "This  is  a  confederacy  of  sovereign  States, 
and  each  may  withdraw  from  the  confederacy  when  it 
chooses";  and  in  the  Ordinance  of  Nullification,  the  South 
Carolina  convention  of  1832  had  warned  the  United  States 
government  that,  if  any  act  of  coercion  were  directed  against 
that  state,  the  people  would  "hold  themselves  absolved  from 
all  further  .  .  .  political  connexion"  with  the  Union.  In 
reply  to  these  assertions,  Maryland,  Delaware  and  Kentucky, 
all  of  them  slave  states,  declared  expressly  against  the  consti 
tutional  right  of  secession.  But  as  the  fundamental  char 
acter  of  the  conflict  between  slavery  and  freedom  became 
apparent  in  the  subsequent  years,  one  southern  state  after 
another  began,  rather  reluctantly,  to  array  itself  at  the  side 
of  South  Carolina  in  her  advanced  constitutional  position. 


THE  STATE  RIGHTS  FETISH  233 

By  1850  the  controversy  over  slavery  reached  an  acute 
stage;  and  the  actual  secession  of  several  southern  states 
was  prevented  only  by  the  enactment  of  Clay's  famous  com 
promise  measures.  These  measures,  in  the  nature  of  the 
case,  were  only  partially  satisfactory  to  the  South;  and 
special  conventions  were  called  in  a  number  of  southern 
states  to  consider  the  advisability  of  secession.  The  conven 
tions  of  Georgia  and  South  Carolina  agreed  that,  although 
the  occasion  was  provocative,  they  would  await  further 
aggressions  of  the  federal  government  before  seceding;  but 
Mississippi  and  Tennessee,  with  no  premonition  of  the  events 
of  1 86 1,  roundly  denounced  secession  as  unsanctioned  by 
the  Constitution. 

The  irritations  produced  by  another  decade  of  sectional 
strife  gave  to  the  South  the  united  front  that  had  hitherto 
been  lacking ;  and  with  the  election  of  Lincoln  and  the  firing 
on  Fort  Sumter,  eleven  southern  states  enacted  ordinances  of 
secession  through  special  state  conventions,  and  one  other 
state,  Kentucky,  standing  athwart  the  military  highway 
between  the  sections,  announced  its  sovereign  decision 
in  favor  of  neutrality.  In  an  eloquent  indictment  of  north 
ern  policy,  the  Mississippi  convention  presented  the 
case  of  the  South  in  its  most  favorable  light:  "We  must 
either  submit  to  degradation  and  to  the  loss  of  property 
[in  slaves]  worth  four  billions  of  money,  or  we  must  secede 
from  the  Union  framed  by  our  fathers,  to  secure  this  as 
well  as  every  other  species  of  property.  For  far  less  cause 
than  this  our  fathers  separated  from  the  Crown  of  England." 

The  victory  of  the  federal  government  in  the  Civil  War 
forever  settled  the  theory  of  state  rights  so  far  as  nullifica 
tion  and  secession  were  concerned.  Express  disavowal  of 
doctrines  so  utterly  discredited  on  the  battlefield  was  hardly 
required;  but  the  southern  state  conventions  of  1865,  ne^ 
to  reorganize  the  state  governments  under  President  John 
son's  supervision,  solemnly  proclaimed  the  invalidity  of  their 


234  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

ordinances  of  secession.  The  conventions  of  South  Carolina 
and  Georgia,  with  a  fine,  if  futile,  consistency,  preferred 
to  repeal  rather  than  to  repudiate  their  ordinances. 

Since  the  Civil  War  the  federal  government  has  pro 
gressed  with  unprecedented  rapidity  toward  a  consolidation 
of  authority.  Steam  and  electricity,  and  the  dwindling  im 
portance  of  state  boundaries  in  matters  of  commerce,  have 
made  many  matters  fit  subjects  for  national  control  which 
seemed  better  off  in  the  hands  of  the  states  one  hundred 
years  ago.  Edward  A.  Freeman,  the  English  historian, 
observed  while  traveling  in  the  United  States  in  1883  that 
"where  the  word  'federal'  used  to  be  used  up  to  the  time 
of  the  civil  war  or  later,  the  word  'national'  is  now  used  all 
but  invariably.  It  used  to  be  'federal  capital,'  'federal  army/ 
'federal  revenue,'  and  so  forth.  Now  the  word  'national'  is 
almost  always  used  instead." 

Protests  against  this  centralizing  tendency  have  been 
expressed  again  and  again;  but  in  these  latter  years  the 
remonstrances  have  not  usually  been  uttered  by  the  states 
in  their  organic  capacities,  nor  have  the  protests  been  de 
signed  to  accomplish  anything  more  than  a  revulsion  of 
public  sentiment  from  the  current  drift  of  events.  In  this 
sense,  stripped  of  its  disunionist  tendencies,  the  state  rights 
doctrine  will  doubtless  always  be  with  us.  Senator  Joseph 
E.  Ramsdell,  speaking  before  the  constitutional  convention 
of  Louisiana  in  1921,  represented  the  views  of  many  present- 
day  believers  in  state  rights  when  he  said:  "The  Nation  is 
rapidly  growing  in  power  and  importance  as  compared  with 
the  States.  Amendments  to  the  Constitution  increasing 
Federal  power  have  been  frequent,  but  whoever  heard  of 
one  in  the  interest  of  the  States  ?  I  have  never  believed  in 
the  extreme  doctrine  of  State  rights  taught  by  many  Demo 
crats  of  the  old  school.  My  leaning  has  been  toward  a 
relatively  strong  central  government,  without  giving  up  what 


THE  STATE  RIGHTS  FETISH  235 

I  deem  essential  to  the  States,  but  the  pace  of  Federal 
encroachment  which  we  have  been  traveling  for  20  years 
has  been  too  fast  for  me.  I  wish  to  see  it  slowed  up,  and 
a  movement  backward  rather  than  forward.  . " 


in 

The  same  pervasive  influences  which  played  upon  states 
and  geographical  sections  and  helped  to  mold  their  consti 
tutional  views  have  affected  the  attitude  of  political  parties 
on  questions  of  constitutional  interpretation.  But,  in  addi 
tion,  another  element  must  be  taken  into  account,  arising 
from  the  psychology  of  politics :  the  party  in  power  always 
feels  that  the  Constitution,  however  broadly  construed,  is 
perfectly  safe  in  its  keeping,  while  the  minority  party  is 
convinced  that  the  welfare  of  the  people  demands  that  the 
majority  should  be  restrained  to  a  very  narrow  exercise  of 
governmental  authority.  Hence  the  "Ins"  have  always 
tended  to  be  strong  nationalists,  and  the  "Outs"  strict  con-  . 
structionists  and  advocates  of  state  rights. 

American  history  is  rich  in  illustrations  of  the  instability 
of  the  constitutional  beliefs  of  parties.  The  Jeffersonian 
Republican  party  originated  in  Washington's  first  adminis 
tration  as  a  party  of  strict  construction  and  state  rights. 
Jefferson's  argument  against  the  constitutionality  of  the 
United  States  Bank  remained  for  many  years  the  classic 
exposition  of  strict  construction  doctrine;  and  the  Virginia 
and  Kentucky  resolutions,  drawn  up  by  Madison  and  Jeffer 
son,  proved  a  veritable  Pandora's  box  of  future  state  rights 
philosophy.  It  seemed  to  the  Republicans  that  the  Feder 
alists,  dominated  by  the  broad  construction  views  of  Hamil 
ton,  were  intent  on  converting  the  federal  government  into 
an  engine  of  centralization  and  virtual  monarchy,  and  that 
the  nation  could  be  saved  from  this  fate  only  by  a  rigid 


236  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

insistence  that  the  government  should  abide  by  the  phrase 
ology  of  the  Constitution  literally  construed. 

But  when  Jefferson  and  his  party  came  into  power,  the 
nee'd  for  applying  brakes  to  the  federal  government  became 
insensibly  less  important  to  them.  The  opportunity  to 
acquire  the  vast  territory  of  Louisiana  from  France  in  1803 
showed  Jefferson,  greatly  to  his  own  surprise,  how  far  he 
had  drifted  from  his  earlier  convictions.  In  an  amazingly 
frank  letter  written  at  the  time,  he  confessed :  "The  consti 
tution  has  made  no  provision  for  our  holding  foreign  terri 
tory.  .  .  .  The  executive,  in  seizing  the  fugitive  occurrence 
which  so  much  advances  the  good  of  our  country,  have  done 
an  act  beyond  the  constitution.  The  Legislature,  in  casting 
behind  them  metaphysical  subtleties,  and  risking  themselves 
like  faithful  servants,  must  ratify  and  pay  for  it,  and  throw 
themselves  on  the  country  for  doing  for  them  what  we 
know  they  would  have  done  for  themselves  had  they  been 
in  a  situation  to  do  it."  In  other  words,  it  was  all  right  to 
violate  the  Constitution  if  Congress  and  the  president 
thought  that  the  mass  of  the  voters  approved. 

The  change  of  front  of  the  Republicans  was  only  equalled 
by  a  similar  reversal  on  the  part  of  the  Federalists.  High 
priests  of  nationalism  and  broad  construction  while  in  power, 
Federalist  leaders  began  to  view  with  alarm  the  centralizing 
tendencies  of  their  successful  opponents.  In  Congress  they 
resisted  the  Louisiana  cession  as  unconstitutional  because 
the  treaty  provided  for  future  membership  in  the  Union. 
The  Federalists  were  pledged  to  the  development  of  com 
merce  and  shipping;  and  the  creation  of  new  states  out  of 
the  Louisiana  wilderness  meant  new  recruits  for  the  agri 
cultural  policies  of  the  Republicans.  Acceptance  of  the 
Louisiana  treaty  would  have  been  for  them  a  form  of  polit 
ical  suicide.  When  the  treaty  was  ratified  in  spite  of  their 
protests,  some  of  the  Federalist  leaders  plotted,  in  their 


THE  STATE  RIGHTS  FETISH  237 

extremity,  to  bring  about  the  secession  of  New  England  and 
New  York  from  the  Union.  The  adhesion  of  New  York 
seemed  to  depend  upon  the  election  of  Aaron  Burr  to  the 
governorship  in  1804;  and  when  Burr  proved  unsuccessful, 
the  conspirators  were  forced  to  defer  their  plans  to  a  more 
propitious  time.  The  nationalistic  trend  of  the  Republicans 
gave  the  Federalists  many  further  causes  for  complaint  in 
the  next  ten  years  and,  as  we  have  already  seen,  led  finally 
to  the  assembling  of  the  Hartford  Convention  in  1814,  under 
the  inspiration  of  disgruntled  Federalist  politicians,  to  consult 
upon  measures  to  restore  New  England  to  its  ancient  position 
in  the  Union. 

By  1816  the  Republicans  had  become  thoroughly  nation 
alized,  their  remaining  scruples  being  dispelled  by  the  patri 
otic  impulses  born  of  the  War  of  1812.  The  legislation 
passed  by  Congress  in  1816  and  1817  shows  how  complete 
the  conversion  was.  Although  the  Republicans  had  refused 
to  re-charter  the  First  United  States  Bank  in  1811,  the  party 
now  proceeded  to  create  a  Second  United  States  Bank  more 
than  three  times  as  large  as  the  one  Hamilton  had  founded. 
A  protective  tariff  was  also  enacted;  and  had  President 
Madison  withheld  his  veto,  a  permanent  fund  would  have 
been  set  aside  for  internal  improvements  at  national  expense. 

The  attitude  of  two  young  members  of  this  Congress 
deserves  especial  mention  in  this  connection.  Daniel  Web 
ster,  a  Federalist  hailing  from  Massachusetts  and  not  yet 
conscious  of  the  relation  of  manufacturing  to  the  future 
prosperity  of  his  section,  opposed  all  this  nationalistic  pro 
gram.  On  the  contrary,  John  C.  Calhoun,  of  South  Caro 
lina,  equally  heedless  of  the  role  that  cotton  was  soon  to  play 
in  the  prosperity  of  the  South,  was  an  eloquent  advocate  of 
broad  construction.  In  words  that  he  was  never  after  per 
mitted  to  forget,  he  denounced  all  tendencies  toward  section 
alism  and  disunion,  and  declared  that  the  Constitution  "was 


238  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

not  intended  as  a  thesis  for  the  logician  to  exercise  his 
ingenuity  on"  but  should  be  construed  in  a  generous  spirit 
and  with  plain  good  sense.  By  1830  the  two  men  had  ex 
changed  positions.  With  a  truer  appreciation  of  the  sources 
of  the  economic  prosperity  of  their  respective  sections, 
Webster  became  the  greatest  advocate  of  nationalism  that 
the  country  possessed  prior  to  the  Civil  War,  and  Calhoun 
became  the  inspired  leader  of  the  state  rights  extremists. 

There  is  no  time  to  dwell  upon  the  shades  of  difference 
between  the  Jackson  Democrats  and  the  Calhoun  Democrats 
as  to  state  rights  doctrine.  Suffice  it  to  say  that  after 
Jackson  retired  from  office  the  southern  Democrats  gained 
control  of  the  party  organization  and,  in  very  large  part, 
stamped  their  peculiar  views  upon  the  party  creed.  Demo 
cratic  platforms  adopted  in  1840  and  thereafter  demanded 
a  strict  construction  of  the  Constitution  ("it  is  inexpedient 
and  dangerous  to  exercise  doubtful  constitutional  powers"), 
and  specifically  denounced  the  protective  tariff,  the  United 
States  Bank  and  national  internal  improvements.  Yet,  not 
withstanding  these  earnest  avowals,  some  of  the  most  striking 
events  of  the  period  down  to  the  Civil  War  came  as  a  result 
of  the  exercise  of  broad  construction  powers  by  these  very 
Democrats ! 

Although,  as  Jefferson  had  admitted  in  1803,  the  Consti 
tution  nowhere  expressly  authorized  the  acquisition  of 
foreign  territory,  the  Democrats  of  this  period  proved  to  be 
the  most  aggressive  expansionists  in  our  history.  Texas 
was  annexed  in  1845,  followed  three  years  later  by  the 
acquisition  of  a  goodly  portion  of  the  neighboring  republic 
of  Mexico.  Polk,  Pierce  and  Buchanan,  unsated,  pressed 
forward  schemes  to  annex  Cuba  and  other  Caribbean  terri 
tories.  Equally  clear  was  the  illegality  of  internal  improve 
ments  by  a  strict  reading  of  the  Constitution ;  yet  Jefferson 
Davis  himself,  as  Secretary  of  War  under  Pierce,  proposed 


THE  STATE  RIGHTS  FETISH  239 

the  construction  of  a  transcontinental  railway  along  a 
southern  route  at  a  cost  estimated  at  perhaps  one  hundred 
million  dollars  to  the  federal  government.  President  Pierce 
endorsed  the  project  and  it  would  probably  have  been  adopted 
by  Congress  had  not  Stephen  A.  Douglas  inopportunely 
revived  sectional  bitterness  by  the  introduction  of  the 
Kansas-Nebraska  Act  in  1854. 

Not  less  instructive  was  the  attitude  of  the  Democratic 
party  toward  the  Dred  Scott  decision  of  1857.  As  long  as 
the  Supreme  Court  remained  a  transmitter  of  doctrines  un 
favorable  to  southern  interests,  that  tribunal  had  been  assailed 
by  state  rights  advocates  as  a  usurper  of  unconstitutional 
powers.  No  principle  had  been  more  firmly  fixed  in  state 
rights  thinking  than  that  the  federal  judiciary  could  not  pass 
judgment  on  the  constitutionality  of  the  acts  of  the  federal 
government.  Now  southern  leaders  everywhere  endorsed 
this  pro-slavery  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  and,  in  the 
language  of  Stephen  A.  Douglas,  maintained  that  "whoever 
resists  the  final  decision  of  the  highest  judicial  tribunal  aims 
a  deadly  blow  to  our  whole  republican  system  of  govern 
ment."  These  lapses  from  state  rights  orthodoxy  were  with 
out  doubt  dictated  by  the  self-interest  of  the  South,  but  in  no 
wise  detracted  from  the  earnestness  with  which  pro-slavery 
Democrats  on  all  other  occasions  asserted  their  constitutional 
right  of  nullification  and  secession. 

In  the  first  presidential  campaign  after  Appomattox  the 
Democrats  hastened  to  clear  their  official  creed  of  those 
elements  of  state  rights  doctrine  that  had  been  rendered 
obsolete  by  the  Civil  War.  Their  platform  of  1868  recog 
nized  "the  questions  of  slavery  and  secession  as  having  been 
settled  for  all  time  to  come  by  the  war  or  the  voluntary  action 
of  the  Southern  States  in  constitutional  conventions  as 
sembled,  .  .  .  never  to  be  renewed  or  reagitated."  Hope 
lessly  in  the  minority  for  many  years  thereafter  and  dis- 


240  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

trustful  of  the  political  capacity  of  the  Republicans,  the 
Democrats  declared  in  their  platforms  again  and  again  for 
a  strict  construction  of  the  Constitution  and  denounced 
Republican  "centralizationism."  In  1892  and  again  in  1912 
they  even  took  the  doctrinaire  position  that  the  protective 
tariff  was  a  violation  of  the  Constitution. 

Their  criticism  of  the  Republicans  was  fully  warranted 
so  far  as  it  related  to  the  undoubted  fact  that  the  power 
of  the  government  at  Washington  was  being  greatly  enlarged 
beyond  the  dreams  of  a  Hamilton  or  a  Webster.  But  the 
explanation  for  this  centripetal  trend  lay  deeper  than  party. 
In  the  era  of  great  economic  expansion  following  the  Civil 
War,  business  overleaped  state  boundaries  and  became 
nationwide.  Labor  and  education  were  likewise  nationalized. 
The  silent  march  of  events  was  making  a  nationalistic  pro 
gram  the  inevitable  code  of  action  of  the  general  government 
irrespective  of  which  party  might  be  in  control. 

Extreme  tariff  protection,  national  supervision  of  state 
elections,  lavish  subsidies  to  railroads  and  other  internal 
improvements — all  these  were  Republican  contributions  to 
the  new  nationalism  at  the  expense  of  a  literal  interpretation 
of  the  Constitution.  But  the  advent  of  the  Democrats  to 
power  in  1885  was  marked  by  no  attempt  to  reinvigorate 
/  the  power  of  the  states.  A  startling  new  assertion  of 
national  authority  came  in  the  passage  of  the  Interstate 
Commerce  Act,  which  President  Cleveland  signed;  and  in 
the  case  of  the  Pullman  strike  of  1893,  he  sent  troops  to 
Chicago  in  defiance  of  the  traditional  reading  of  the  Consti 
tution.  In  the  latter  instance  Governor  Altgeld  of  Illinois, 
who  had  refused  to  apply  for  federal  assistance,  felt  called 
upon  to  remind  the  Democratic  president  that  "The  principle 
of  local  self-government  is  just  as  fundamental  in  our 
institutions  as  is  that  of  federal  supremacy." 

In  the  opening  years  of  the  twentieth  century  the  artificial 


THE  STATE  RIGHTS  FETISH  241 

nature  of  party  gestures  on  constitutional  questions  has 
appeared  clearer  than  ever  before.  Roosevelt  in  his  admin 
istration  of  the  government  proved  to  be  an  aggressive 
nationalist,  and  aroused  the  bitter  animosity  of  the  Demo 
crats  because  of  the  alleged  unconstitutional  character  of 
many  of  his  acts.  The  Democratic  platform  of  1904  de 
nounced  the  "strained  and  unnatural  constructions  upon 
statutes,"  stigmatized  Roosevelt's  interference  in  the  Panama 
Revolution  as  unconstitutional,  and  called  for  the  election 
of  a  president  "who  will  set  his  face  sternly  against  executive 
usurpation  of  legislative  and  judicial  functions,  whether  that 
usurpation  be  veiled  under  the  guise  of  executive  construc 
tion  of  existing  laws,  or  whether  it  take  refuge  in  the  tyrant's 
plea  of  necessity  or  superior  wisdom." 

But  the  tables  were  turned  with  the  accession  of  Wilson 
and  his  party  to  power  in  1913.  Eager  to  meet  the  impera 
tive  needs  of  the  times,  the  Democrats  used  their  power  to 
pass  law  after  law  that  could  be  justified  only  by  a  very 
elastic  interpretation  of  the  Constitution.  A  child  labor  law 
was  placed  upon  the  statute  books  in  1916,  based  upon  the 
interstate  commerce  power  of  Congress;  and  when  the  act 
was  pronounced  unconstitutional  by  the  Supreme  Court, 
Congress  proceeded  to  enact  another  law  for  the  same 
purpose  based  upon  the  taxing  power.  The  Federal  Trade 
Commission  Act,  the  Federal  Reserve  Act  and  the  Federal 
Farm  Loan  Act  represented  other  vast  extensions  of  national 
authority  by  the  Democrats.  Of  the  Federal  Reserve  Act 
Senator  Ramsdell,  one  of  its  southern  supporters,  said  in  an 
address  before  the  Louisiana  constitutional  convention  in 
1921  that  it  "places  colossal  power  in  the  Federal  Govern 
ment,  a  power  which  is  intended  for  good  .  .  .  but  .  .  . 
which  in  the  hands  of  an  ambitious  autocrat  or  corrupt  board 
can  be  used  to  work  great  evil."  He  further  asserted  that 
the  Adamson  Eight-Hour  Law  of  1916,  establishing  a 


242  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

standard  eight-hour  day  for  the  railroads,  "steps  on  the 
toes  of  the  States  pretty  hard  and  in  many  ways." 

When  a  country  is  engaged  in  war,  one  expects  a  great 
concentration  of  power  in  the  hands  of  the  government  at 
Washington ;  but  even  in  this  respect  the  Democratic  admin 
istration  went  to  extremes.  At  President  Wilson's  behest, 
Congress  passed  the  selective  draft  law ;  and  this  was  soon 
followed  by  statutes  vesting  in  the  federal  government  far- 
reaching  powers  of  control  over  railroads,  telephones,  fuel, 
food,  prices,  alcoholic  beverages,  and  indeed  over  freedom 
of  speech  and  of  the  press.  However  temporary  some  of 
these  measures  may  have  been  in  their  importance,  the 
Democratic  Congress  proposed  two  new  amendments  to  the 
Constitution  which  invaded  domains  which  had  long  been 
jealously  guarded  by  the  states,  one  providing  for  the  aboli 
tion  of  intoxicating  liquors  and  the  other  forbidding  the 
states  to  deny  the  suffrage  to  women. 

Many  of  these  laws,  particularly  those  adopted  before  the 
United  States  entered  the  World  War,  were  hotly  contested 
in  Congress  as  unwarranted  by  the  Constitution;  and  the 
Democratic  president  was  bitterly  denounced  by  his  Repub 
lican  opponents  for  his  "unconstitutional  and  dictatorial 
course,"  just  as  Roosevelt  had  formerly  been  by  the  Demo 
crats.  In  an  almost  perfect  paraphrase  of  the  Democratic 
platform  of  1904,  the  Republican  platform  of  1920  said  of 
President  Wilson :  "Under  the  despot's  plea  of  necessity  or 
superior  wisdom,  Executive  usurpation  of  legislative  and 
judicial  functions  .  .  .  undermines  our  institutions."  The 
chorus  of  opposition  reached  its  climax  when  President 
Wilson  returned  from  the  Paris  Peace  Conference  with  the 
Covenant  of  the  League  of  Nations.  The  Republican  sena 
tors,  unable  to  reconcile  themselves  to  a  pact  which  they 
claimed  bound  the  United  States  contrary  to  stipulations  of 
the  national  Constitution,  managed  to  prevent  ratification  by 
the  United  States. 


THE  STATE  RIGHTS  FETISH  243 


IV 

The  facts  that  have  been  presented  in  the  foregoing  dis 
cussion  speak  for  themselves.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that 
state  rights  agitation  has  played  a  large  part  in  American 
history;  but  it  is  equally  clear  that  the  controversy  must 
always  be  studied  in  its  relation  to  time  and  circumstances. 
The  state  rights  doctrine  has  never  Had  any  real  vitality 
independent  of  underlying  conditions  of  vast  social,  economic 
or  political  significance.  The  group  advocating  state  rights 
at  any  period  have  sought  its  shelter  in  much  the  same  spirit 
that  a  western  pioneer  seeks  his  storm-cellar  when  a  tornado 
is  raging.  The  doctrine  has  served  as  a  species  of  protective 
coloration  against  the  threatening  onslaughts  of  a  powerful 
foe.  As  a  well-known  American  historian  has  tersely  said, 
"Scratch  a  Wisconsin  farmer  and  you  find  a  Georgia 
planter!" 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Beginning  with  the  foundation  of  the  federal  government,  in 
numerable  treatises  have  been  written  and  addresses  made  upon 
the  nature  of  the  Union.  These  discussions  were  usually  contro 
versial  in  purpose  and  designed  to  supply  historical  reasons  to  show 
why  the  general  government  should  enjoy  greater  or  less  authority 
in  its  relation  to  the  states  and  the  people  thereof.  Some  of  the 
greatest  minds  in  our  history  have  grappled  with  this  central  prob 
lem  of  federated  government,  for  example,  James  Madison, 
Alexander  Hamilton,  Thomas  Jefferson,  John  Marshall,  Joseph 
Story,  Daniel  Webster,  John  C.  Calhoun  and  Abraham  Lincoln ;  and 
more  recently  the  legal  aspects  of  the  problem  have  been  learnedly 
discussed  from  an  academic  point  of  view  by  John  W.  Burgess,  J. 
Allen  Smith,  W.  W.  Willoughby  and  others.  For  an  excellent  his 
torical  summary  of  American  political  theory  dealing  with  the  nature 
of  the  Union,  see  C.  Edward  Merriam's  A  History  of  American 
Political  Theories  (New  York,  1903),  chap,  vii,  and  his  American 
Political  Ideas,  1865-1917  (New  York,  1920),  chap.  yiii. 

The  point  of  view,  which  forms  the  basis  of  the  discussion  in  the 
present  volume,  was  suggested  by  Alexander  Johnston  in  John  J. 
Lalor's  Cyclopedia  of  Political  Science,  Political  Economy  and  of 
the  Political  History  of  the  United  States  (3  v.;  New  York,  1893), 
vol.  Hi,  p.  794,  so  far  as  the  relation  of  states  to  the  federal  govern 
ment  is  concerned.  Its  detailed  application  in  the  case  of  particular 
states  was  worked  out  in  David  Franklin  Houston's  A  Critical  Study 


244  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

of  Nullification  in  South  Carolina  (New  York,  1896)  ;  William  A. 
Schaper's  "Sectionalism  and  Representation  in  South  Carolina"  in 
the  Annual  Report  of  the  American  Historical  Association  for  1900, 
vol.  i,  pp.  237-463 ;  Ulrich  Bonnell  Phillips's  "Georgia  and  State 
Rights"  in  the  Annual  Report  of  the  American  Historical  Associa 
tion  for  1901,  vol.  ii;  and  later,  in  Charles  Henry  Ambler's  Section 
alism  in  Virginia  from  1776  to  1861  (Chicago,  1910).  In  1906 
appeared  Herman  V.  Ames's  compilation  of  official  documents 
entitled  State  Documents  on  Federal  Relations:  The  States  and  the 
United  States  (Philadelphia),  a  collection  which  showed  that  what 
held  true  in  the  case  of  South  Carolina  and  Georgia  was  likewise 
true  of  the  other  states  in  their  attitude  toward  the  general  govern 
ment.  Every  student  of  American  history  would  do  well  to  be 
acquainted  with  Dean  Ames's  volume. 

Although  the  foregoing  works  are  primarily  concerned  with  the 
official  attitude  of  the  states  on  constitutional  questions,  the  view 
point  readily  furnishes  a  key  to  the  constitutional  doctrines  of  the 
great  political  parties.  In  the  sketch  in  the  present  volume,  some 
illustrations  have  been  drawn  from  political  history  to  show  the 
changeable  character  of  party  views  on  the  nature  of  the  Constitu 
tion.  In  this  connection  a  violently  partisan  book  entitled  Logic  of 
History.  Five  Hundred  Political  Texts:  Being  Concentrated  Ex 
tracts  of  Abolitionism;  Also,  Results  of  Slavery  Agitation  and 
Emancipation  (Madison,  1864)  is  of  interest.  Annotated  by  S.  D. 
Carpenter,  a  Copperhead  editor,  the  work  contains  hundreds  of 
excerpts  from  political  speeches,  party  newspapers,  and  resolutions 
of  local  party  conventions  to  show  that  expressions  of  strict  con 
struction  and  disunionism  were  by  no  means  confined  to  the  ante 
bellum  Democratic  party.  It  is  perhaps  worth  noting  that  Alexander 
Johnston,  who  saw  clearly  the  artificial  character  of  the  state  rights 
theory  as  avowed  by  the  several  states,  would  probably  not  have 
agreed  that  the  same  conclusion  held  true  of  political  parties.  See 
passage  in  his  History  of  American  Politics  (New  York,  1882), 

P.  2. 


CHAPTER   XI 

THE  FOUNDATIONS  OF  THE   MODERN   ERA 


It  is  the  custom  of  students  of  European  history  to  place 
the  beginning  of  modern  times  several  centuries  ago,  indeed 
at  about  the  time  that  Christopher  Columbus  set  sail  for 
America;  and  when  one  reviews  the  long  painful  struggle 
of  Europe,  reaching  back  into  the  dim  mists  of  antiquity, 
to  attain  its  present  stage  of  civilization,  no  serious  question 
can  be  raised  with  this  practice.1  But  the  history  of  the 
white  man  in  America  is  painted  upon  a  smaller  canvas ;  the 
total  period  of  time  embraced  is  comparatively  short;  and 
the  physical  environment  has  been  such  as  to  reproduce  many 
of  the  primitive  social  and  institutional  conditions  which  the 
progress  of  European  peoples  had  long  since  rendered  obso 
lete  in  the  Old  World.  Therefore  it  may  be  admissible  to 
think  of  the  modern  era  of  America  independently  of  the 
corresponding  period  in  Europe;  and  without  seeking  to 
strain  the  analogy,  there  is  an  advantage  in  viewing  the 
earlier  history  of  America  as  divided  into  periods  which  are 
strongly  suggestive  of  the  ancient  and  medieval  periods  of 
European  history. 

Ancient  American  history  was,  from  the  standpoint  of 
the  white  man,  the  age  of  discovery  and  European  coloniza 
tion,  and  was  itself  preceded  by  a  "pre-historic"  period  of 

1  However,  the  suggestion  of  Harry  Elmer  Barnes,  writing  in  the  spirit  of 
Wells's  Outline  of  History,  that  modern  times  might  more  correctly  be  dated 
from  neolithic  man  has  large  corrective  value  for  the  historical  student.  See 
"The  Past  and  Future  in  History"  in  the  Historical  Outlook,  vol.  xii,  p.  48 
(February,  1921). 

245 


246  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

native  Indian  civilizations,  the  records  of  which  have  come 
to  us  in  the  form  of  monuments,  ornaments,  and  picture- 
writing.  The  keynote  of  ancient  American  history  was  the 
transplantation  of  an  advanced  civilization  to  a  primitive  and 
undeveloped  world.  The  transition  to  the  medieval  period 
came  when  the  English  colonies,  and  later  the  Spanish 
colonies,  severed  political  connections  with  the  Old  World 
by  means  of  revolutionary  wars  for  independence.  In  the 
case  of  the  United  States  the  Middle  Period  was  charac 
terized  by  the  dissensions  and  jealousies  of  baronies  (or 
states)  with  the  growing  power  of  the  overlord  (or  federal 
government),  and  the  entire  national  life  was  strongly  tinc 
tured  by  the  plantation  system  of  the  South  with  its  feudal 
lords  and  black  vassals. 

Medieval  American  history  was  brought  to  a  close  by  two 
epochal  events.  The  first  of  these,  the  victory  of  the  federal 
government  in  the  Civil  War,  discredited  forever  the  doctrine, 
of  state  sovereignty  and  destroyed  the  anachronism  of 
slavery.  The  other  event  was,  in  its  lasting  effects,  more 
significant  than  the  war  itself,  although,  strangely  enough, 
the  historians  of  the  period  have  little  to  say  about  it.  This 
was  the  great  economic  revolution  which  swept  through  the 
nation  at  high  tide  from  about  1860  to  1880  and  willy  nilly 
projected  America  into  Modern  Times. 

Life  in  the  United  States  before  the  Civil  War  had  a 
peculiar  static  quality  so  far  as  the  essentials  of  living  were 
concerned.  There  were  no  great  cities  in  our  modern  sense, 
and  fewer  than  a  half-dozen  millionaires.  People  in  general 
lived  comfortably  and  wastefully.  There  was  virtual  equal 
ity  of  material  possessions  and  always  an  opportunity  for 
the  man  who  could  not  make  a  livelihood  in  the  crowded 
portions  of  the  country  to  make  a  clean  start  on  the  frontier. 
An  old  letter  recently  discovered  in  the  files  of  the  United 
States  Patent  Office  shows  that  in  1833  the  head  of  that 


FOUNDATIONS  OF  THE  MODERN  ERA  247 

department  wished  to  resign  because  he  felt  that  the  limit 
of  human  invention  had  been  reached  and  there  would  be 
no  further  need  of  his  services. 

To  be  sure,  mute  forces  were  working  beneath  the  surface 
of  American  society  that  were  prophetic  of  future  changes ; 
but  these  were  little  heeded  or  understood  at  the  time.  There 
had  occurred  an  industrial  revolution  in  England  in  the  latter 
part  of  the  eighteenth  century,  the  significance  of  which 
appeared  in  the  introduction  of  the  factory  system  into  that 
country  and  the  profoundly  changed  relations  in  industry 
and  society  that  resulted.  Under  the  influence  of  the  em 
bargo  and  the  tariffs  of  1816  and  1824,  manufacturing  had 
begun  to  develop  in  certain  districts  of  the  seaboard  states 
of  the  North ;  but  the  country  as  a  whole  was  untouched  by 
the  factory  system,  being  predominantly  agricultural  in  its 
interests  and  modes  of  living.  Nearly  four-fifths  of  the 
people  continued  to  live  on  the  farm. 

In  most  respects -the  daily  routine  of  life  with  which 
Webster  and  Lincoln,  were  familiar  was  the  same  as  that 
of  George  Washington  and  Benjamin  Franklin ;  and  there 
was  in  no  sense  the  profound  contrast  that  we  have  between 
the  times  of  Lincoln  and  those  we  live  in  today.  As  Pro 
fessor  Cubberley  has  pointed  out,  if  Lincoln  were  to  return 
now  and  walk  about  Washington,  he  would  be  surprised  and 
bewildered  by  the  things  he  would  see.  Buildings  more  than 
three  or  four  stories  high  would  be  new.  The  plate-glass 
show  windows  of  the  stores,  the  electric  street-lighting,  the 
moving-picture  theatres,  the  electric  elevators  in  the  buildings 
and  especially  the  big  department  stores  would  be  things  in 
his  day  unknown.  The  smooth-paved  streets  and  cement 
sidewalks  would  be  new  to  him.  The  fast-moving  electric 
street-cars  and  motor  vehicles  would  fill  him  with  wonder. 
Even  a  boy  on  a  bicycle  would  be  a  curiosity.  Entering  the 
White  House,  someone  would  have  to  explain  to  him  such 


248  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

commonplaces  of  modern  life  as  sanitary  plumbing,  steam 
heating,  friction  matches,  telephones,  electric  lights,  the 
Victrola,  and  even  the  fountain  pen.  In  Lincoln's  day, 
plumbing  was  in  its  beginnings,  coal-oil  lamps  and  gas-jets 
were  just  coming  into  use,  and  the  steel  pen  had  only  recently 
superseded  the  quill  pen.  The  steel  rail,  the  steel  bridge, 
high-powered  locomotives,  refrigerator  cars,  artificial  ice,  the 
cream  separator,  the  twine  binder,  the  caterpillar  tractor, 
money  orders,  the  parcels  post,  rural  free  delivery,  the  cable, 
the  wireless,  gasoline  engines,  repeating  rifles,  dynamite,  sub 
marines,  airplanes — these  and  hundreds  of  other  inventions 
now  in  common  use  were  all  alike  unknown. 

A  number  of  things  conspired  to  introduce  a  new  economic 
and  social  order  into  American  life  in  the  sixties  and  the 
seventies.  The  high  war  tariffs  caused  men  of  capital  to 
invest  their  money  in  manufacturing ;  and  government  con 
tracts  for  war  supplies  gave  impetus  to  this  development. 
The  state  and  national  governments  embarked  on  a  policy 
of  making  vast  grants  of  land  and  credit  to  railroad  enter 
prises,  thus  laying  the  foundations  for  the  modern  era  of 
railway  development.  The  passage  of  the  free  homestead 
law  of  1862  caused  a  rush  of  population  toward  the  West, 
a  movement  that  was  vastly  stimulated  by  the  opening  up 
of  the  less  accessible  regions  by  the  railroads.  These  various 
factors  reacted  upon  each  other.  Thus,  the  railroads  called 
upon  the  factories  for  the  manufacture  of  steel  rails  and 
locomotives,  and  by  means  of  their  iron  highways  supplied 
new  markets  for  eastern  manufacturers  as  well  as  for  the 
western  farmers.  The  unprecedented  activity  along  all  lines 
of  economic  endeavor  imposed  fresh  demands  upon  Amer 
ican  inventive  genius  to  which  it  responded  with  countless 
new  appliances  and  machines  for  farm  and  factory. 

So  rapid  and  comprehensive  were  the  changes  that  oc 
curred  in  the  two  decades  following  Lincoln's  inauguration 


FOUNDATIONS  OF  THE  MODERN  ERA  249 

that  no  less  a  term  than  "economic  revolution"  is  required 
to  describe  them.  Referring  particularly  to  American  in 
dustrial  development,  the  United  States  Industrial  Commis 
sion  declared  in  1902  that  "the  changes  and  the  progress  since 
1865  have  been  greater  in  many  directions  than  during  the 
whole  history  of  the  world  before."  In  contrast  to  the 
industrial  revolution  in  England,  however,  the  economic 
revolution  was  not  merely  a  revolution  in  manufacturing 
processes.  In  just  as  significant  a  sense  it  was  an  agricul 
tural  revolution  and  also  a  revolution  in  transportation.  The 
United  States  was  transformed  in  a  generation  from  a  nation 
employing  primitive  methods  of  agriculture  and  importing 
most  of  her  manufactures  from  abroad,  into  an  industrialized 
country  with  an  export  trade  in  farm  and  factory  products 
that  reached  the  outer  fringes  of  the  globe.  It  is  to  this  new 
economic  basis  of  American  life  that  the  historian  must 
ascribe  the  characteristic  events  of  recent  history — the  new 
issues,  the  changed  character  of  political  parties,  the  growing 
conflict  between  capital  and  labor,  our  complex  social  prob 
lems,  indeed  our  very  intellectual  and  cultural  ideals  and 
aspirations. 

The  full  force  of  these  new  energies  was  not  immediately 
apparent,  because  the  attention  of  the  public,  after  the  great 
emotional  experience  of  the  Civil  War,  was  for  the  time 
being  riveted  upon  certain  perplexing  questions  concerning 
the  emancipated  negroes  and  the  political  reconstruction  of 
the  South.  But  with  the  truer  perspective  made  possible  by 
the  passage  of  years  the  historians  are  beginning  to  give  less 
attention  to  southern  reconstruction  and  more  to  northern 
reconstruction,  since  the  financial  and  industrial  reorganiza 
tion  of  the  North  has  proved  to  be  of  greater  enduring 
importance. 

Notwithstanding  the  transient  importance  of  after- war 
issues,  thoughtful  people  everywhere  were  conscious  of  an 


250  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

impending  change  in  the  fundamentals  oi  American  life  or 
of  a  change  perhaps  already  accomplished.  In  1871,  Henry 
Ward  Beecher,  speaking  in  a  prophetic  sense,  declared :  "We 
are  today  in  more  danger  from  overgrown  pecuniary  inter 
ests — from  organized  money — than  we  ever  were  from 
slavery,  and,jhe  battle  of  the  future  is  to  be  one  of  gold 
and  silver."  \  That  amazing  book  published  a  few  years  ago, 
The  Education*  of  Henry  Adams,  has  as  its  dominant  recur 
ring  note  the  unwillingness  or  inability  of  a  descendant  of 
John  and  John  Quincy  Adams  to  accept  the  changed  social 
order  born  of  the  economic  revolution.  In  a  revealing 
passage  dealing  with  the  great  economic  overturn,  Henry 
Adams,  following  his  habit  of  speaking  of  himself  in  the 
third  person,  confessed:  "the  result  of  this  revolution  on 
a  survivor  from  the  fifties  resembled  the  action  of  the  earth 
worm;  he  twisted  about,  in  vain,  to  recover  his  starting- 
point  ;  he  could  no  longer  see  his  own  trail ;  he  had  become 
an  estray^a  flotsam  or  jetsam  of  wreckage.  .  .  .  His  world 
was  dead.  /  Not  a  Polish  Jew  fresh  from  Warsaw  or  Cracow 
.  .  .  but  had  a  keener  instinct,  an  intenser  energy,  and  a 
freer  hand  than  he — American  of  Americans,  with  Heaven 
knew  how  many  Puritans  and  Patriots  behind  him,  and  an 
education  that  had  cost  a  civil  war.  .  .  .  One  comfort  he 
could  enjoy  to  the  full.  Little  as  he  might  be  fitted  for  the 
work  that  was  before  him,  he  had  only  to  look  at  his  father 
[Charles  Francis  Adams]  and  [John  Lothrop]  Motley  to 
see  figures  less  fitted  for  it  than  he.  All  were  equally  sur 
vivals  from  the  forties — bric-a-brac  from  the  time  of  Louis 
Philippe.  ..." 

Political  leadership  naturally  fell  to  men  who  were  in 
harmony  with  the  changed  conditions  of  American  life.  The 
new  school  of  statesmen  were  men  of  a  practical  stamp,  not 
profound  students  of  history  like  Madison  nor  keen  theore 
ticians  like  Calhoun  nor  great  orators  like  Webster.  They 


FOUNDATIONS  OF  THE  MODERN  ERA  251 

have  been  men  of  affairs  interested  in  directing  the  energies 
of  the  government  in  such  a  way  as  to  permit  the  rapid 
development  of  the  natural  resources  of  the  country  and  the 
building  up  of  gigantic  business  enterprises.  Such  questions 
as  "sound  money,"  government  aids  to  industry,  the  protec 
tive  tariff  and  trust  regulation  became  the  dominant  issues  in 
politics.  Some  of  these  men  were  unscrupulous  and  cor 
rupt  ;  but  most  of  them  were  sincere  and  patriotic,  believing, 
rightly  or  wrongly,  that  the  national  prosperity  depended 
upon  the  accumulation  of  wealth  in  a  few  hands.  The  newer 
statesmanship  was  represented  by  such  men  as  Roscoe  Conk- 
ling  of  New  York,  James  G.  Elaine  of  Maine,  Samuel  J. 
Randall  of  Pennsylvania,  and,  a  little  later,  by  Marcus  Hanna 
of  Ohio  and  Nelson  W.  Aldrich  of  Rhode  Island.  All  these 
men  made  a  strong  impression  upon  their  contemporaries, 
but  few  of  their  names  will  live  in  history.  While  their 
prototypes  are  still  common  in  American  politics,  the  group 
as  a  whole  reached  the  zenith  of  their  power  before  1900 
and  have  enjoyed  less  influence  since. 

The  reform  spirit  was  not  without  its  exponents  within 
the  ranks  of  the  dominant  parties  after  the  Civil  War;  but 
even  the  reformers,  such  men  as  Grover  Cleveland,  George 
W.  Curtis  and  Carl  Schurz,  did  not  quarrel  seriously  with 
the  political  objects  of  the  men  who  were  usually  in  power. 
They  warred,  rather,  against  inefficiency  and  corruption  in 
the  conduct  of  government.  Their  efforts  secured  ballot 
reform,  civil  service  reform  and  the  entering  wedge  of  tariff 
reform ;  but  they  never  ceased  to  resent  the  charge  that  they 
were  idealists  or  closet  philosophers.  It  was  Cleveland  who 
expressed  the  thought  of  this  earnest  minority  when  he  said 
in  the  course  of  fighting  for  one  of  his  great  reforms :  "It  is 
a  condition  that  confronts  us,  not  a  theory."  Indeed  the  idea 
of  political  reform  for  purely  humanitarian  objects  has 
found  a  lodging  place  in  the  minds  of  effective  party  leaders 


252  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

only  since  about  1900,  and  the  new  conception  represented  a 
reaction  against  the  materialistic  bent  of  the  political  gen 
eration  which  had  dominated  public  life  down  to  that  time. 


The  real  significance  of  the  economic  revolution  in  the 
making  of  modern  America  is  more  readily  seen  upon  a 
closer  examination  of  the  three  great  fields  of  transportation, 
agriculture  and  manufacturing,  in  which  the  chief  changes 
occurred. 

In  1860  there  were  thirty  thousand  miles  of  railroad  in 
this  country;  this  number  had  doubled  by  1870  and  trebled 
by  1880,  being  greatly  increased  by  the  building  of  the  five 
transcontinental  lines.  By  the  close  of  the  century  it  had 
reached  the  astounding  total  of  almost  two  hundred  thou 
sand  miles,  equivalent  to  an  eight-track  railroad  encircling 
the  globe.  The  increase  of  mileage  was  attended  by  a 
growth  of  consolidation  of  management.  Until  about  1870, 
a  railroad  a  few  hundred  miles  in  length  constituted  the 
maximum  for  efficient  operation.  A  traveler  from  New 
York  to  the  Mississippi  might  be  required  to  make  no  less 
than  a  half  dozen  bodily  transfers  from  one  line  to  another. 
The  Illinois  Central,  with  seven  hundred  miles  of  track,  was 
long  considered  one  of  the  greatest  railroads  in  the  world. 
After  1870  began  the  development  of  "through  lines,"  and 
the  maximum  length  of  a  single  railroad  became  five  thou 
sand  miles.  Since  1890,  consolidation  has  progressed  to  new 
limits.  Railroad  systems  have  grown  out  of  the  amalgama 
tion  of  through  lines,  some  of  them  comprising  twenty 
thousand  miles  of  track  under  common  control.  The  rail 
way  employees  in  1900  represented  an  army  of  one  million 
men,  a  number  which  has  now  swollen  to  two  millions  and 
which,  including  their  families,  means  that  today  more  than 
eight  million  persons  are  directly  interested  in  the  welfare  of 
the  railroad  industry. 


FOUNDATIONS  OF  THE  MODERN  ERA  253 

The  rapid  expansion  of  the  railroads,  with  its  attendant 
shrinkage  of  distances,  was  of  incalculable  value  in  helping 
to  bring  together  again  the  South  and  the  North  in  a  new 
unity  of  purpose.  But  more  obvious  to  people  at  the  time 
was  the  service  of  the  railroads  in  facilitating  the  settlement 
of  the  West.  The  world  was  astonished  at  the  rapidity  with 
which  the  virginal  spaces  of  the  West  were  occupied.  By 
1900  the  Union  had  grown  in  forty  years  from  thirty-three 
states  to  forty-five.  Lands  and  natural  resources  which  had 
seemed  illimitable  in  1860  thus  passed,  in  very  large  part, 
into  the  possession  of  private  owners.  By  1890  the  official 
frontier  had  vanished ;  and  the  lands  left  in  the  government's 
keeping  were  not  such  as  to  attract  settlers. 

As  a  result  an  important  social  force  disappeared  from 
American  life.  With  this  means  of  escape  cut  off,  life  has 
tended  to  become  a  bitter  and  sometimes  hopeless  struggle 
for  men  who  cannot  make  their  way  against  the  fierce  com 
petition  of  the  more  populous  sections  of  the  country.  Social 
conditions  in  the  United  States  for  the  first  time  begin  to 
approach  the  conditions  of  life  in  the  Old  World.  \  In  a 
somewhat  tardy  attempt  to  restore  the  earlier  conditions  of 
western  settlement,  the  conservation  movement,  fathered  by 
President  Roosevelt,  found  one  of  its  chief  sources  of  in 
spiration.  Since  1900  commendable  progress  has  been  made 
by  the  government  in  irrigating  arid  lands,  draining  swamp 
lands,  protecting  mineral  resources  owned  by  the  govern 
ment,  and  providing  for  the  replanting  of  deforested  tracts. 

Another  stream  of  influences  flowed  from  the  rapid 
growth  of  the  railroads.  The  unscrupulous  practices  of  the 
railroads  in  the  early  days  of  overcharging  and  discrimi 
nating  against  the  western  settlers  led  to  a  great  farmers' 
movement  of  protest  in  the  seventies,  which  has  found  a 
place  in  history  as  the  "Granger  movement."  The  outcome 
of  this  early  attempt  of  American  farmers  at  organized 
action  was  the  enactment  of  the  first  state  legislation  to  regu- 


254  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

late  railroads ;  and  the  acceptance  of  this  novel  principle  by 
the  states  led  in  turn  to  its  adoption  by  Congress  in  the 
Interstate  Commerce  Act  of  1887.  These  laws  were  of 
epochal  importance,  for  they  represented  the  first  system 
atic  effort  of  the  government  to  cope  with  the  growing  evils 
of  corporate  wealth. 

While  the  agricultural  revolution  since  the  Civil  War  can 
not  be  considered  apart  from  railroad  expansion,  it  never 
theless  left  its  own  peculiar  impress  upon  the  modern  Ameri 
can  era.  The  farming  industry  grew  at  an  unparalleled 
pace.  Between  1870  and  1880  the  farms  of  the  nation  were 
increased  by  an  area  equal  to  that  of  France;  and  between 
1880  and  the  end  of  the  century  a  domain  was  added  equal 
to  the  European  area  of  France,  England,  Wales  and  the 
German  Empire  of  1914.  An  important  factor  in  this 
growth  was  the  widely  extended  use  of  improved  labor- 
saving  machinery,  including  the  substitution  of  horse  power 
and  steam  power  for  manual  labor,  and  the  application  of 
scientific  methods  to  agriculture.  The  expansion  of  farm 
ing  was  too  rapid  for  the  needs  of  the  country;  "overpro 
duction"  followed,  causing  low  prices  for  crops  and  a  pro 
longed  period  of  hard  times  for  the  rural  population.  The 
situation  was  aggravated  by  the  fact  that  many  of  the 
farmers  had  borrowed  heavily  of  eastern  capitalists  in  order 
to  finance  their  undertakings.  According  to  the  census  of 
1890,  the  mortgage  indebtedness  of  agricultural  lands  had 
increased  from  $343,000,000  to  $586,000,000  in  a  period  of 
ten  years.  A  very  large  percentage  of  the  farm  properties 
west  of  the  Mississippi  was  under  mortgage  at  the  time  of 
the  census;  and  very  bad  conditions  were  also  to  be  found 
in  the  states  east  of  the  river.  Between  1890  and  1895 
hundreds  of  settlers  in  the  semiarid  West  were  forced  to 
give  up  their  farms  to  the  persons  who  held  mortgages  on 
them.  In  the  South  very  similar  conditions  prevailed,  where 


FOUNDATIONS  OF  THE  MODERN  ERA  255 

the  lands  devastated  by  the  Civil  War  were  in  process  of 
being  brought  under  cultivation  again  and  the  old  plantation 
•  system  was  being  gradually  replaced  by  small  independent 
farms. 

These  were  ideal  conditions  for  the  fertilization  of  unrest 
and  discontent;  and  so  it  happened  that  for  many  years  the 
agricultural  population  proved  to  be  a  hotbed  of  radical 
agitation..  Untrained  in  the  intricacies  of  economics,  their 
minds  turned  naturally  to  certain  simple  and  plausible  reme 
dies  to  relieve  their  distresses;  and  the  precariousness  of 
their  means  of  livelihood  lent  a  religious  zeal  to  their  con 
victions.  Greenback  inflation,  free  silver  and  Populism,  all 
movements  that  bulk  large  in  American  history  since  the 
Civil  War,  recruited  their  chief  strength  in  the  farming 
states  of  the  West  and  the  South.  It  was  not  until  about 
1900  that  the  rural  population  came  to  take  their  place  as  the 
great  conservative  force  in  American  politics.  From  1894 
down  to  1900  a  series  of  excellent  crops  of  wheat  and  corn 
and  an  advance  in  the  price  of  livestock  occurred.  Farm 
products  also  received  preferential  treatment  in  the  Republi 
can  tariffs  of  1890  and  1897;  and  after  1896  occurred  an 
increase  in  the  circulating  medium  of  the  country  due  to  the 
discovery  of  new  sources  of  gold  supply.  Thousands  of 
mortgages  on  western  farms  were  paid  off  with  a  consequent 
reduction  of  the  rate  of  interest  on  farm  loans.  Farming 
thus  became  profitable  again ;  and  the  farmer  became  inter 
ested  in  maintaining  the  status  quo.  With  the  outbreak  of 
the  World  War  unexpected  difficulties  faced  the  farmer ;  and 
the  last  few  years  have  witnessed  a  return  of  aggressive 
farmer  organizations  seeking  to  achieve  more  favorable  con 
ditions  for  agriculture. 

More  significant  than  the  revolution  in  transportation  or 
even  the  agricultural  revolution  has  been  the  transformation 
of  our  industrial  system.  The  small  beginnings  in  manu- 


256  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

facturing  made  before  the  Civil  War  were  completely 
eclipsed  by  the  epochal  developments  since  then.  Indeed, 
according  to  the  United  States  Industrial  Commission  re 
porting  in  1902,  these  developments  constituted  "probably 
the  most  rapid  change  in  the  methods  of  industry  observable 
at  any  time  in  history."  It  would  be  tedious,  even  if  it  were 
practicable,  to  sketch  the  marvelous  advances  in  invention 
and  mechanism  upon  which  the  industrial  revolution  was 
based.  The  records  of  the  Patent  Office  throw  some  light 
on  the  matter.  In  the  entire  period  before  1860,  something 
less  than  36,000  patents  had  been  granted;  in  the  remaining 
years  of  the  century  the  number  of  patents  issued  reached 
the  astonishing  total  of  almost  640,000.  The  widespread 
use  of  improved  mechanical  appliances  meant  more  efficient 
processes,  labor  saving,  and  a  great  cheapening  in  the  cost  of 
production. 

Progress  in  invention  was  accompanied  and  fostered  by 
improvements  in  the  organization  of  industry.  Manufac 
turing  carried  on  in  a  small  plant  was  discovered  to  be  less 
efficient  and  less  economical  than  production  upon  a  large 
scale.  Industrial  organizations  have  tended  to  grow  until,  in 
many  lines,  they  include  vastly  more  than  a  single  great 
factory  but  a  unified  system  comprehending  many  factories 
and  making  by-products  and  accessory  products  as  well  as 
the  major  product.  Within  twenty  years  after  the  close  of 
the  Civil  War  the  trust  and  other  forms  of  large  industrial 
combination  had  begun  to  occupy  their  dominant  position  in 
modern  American  life. 

The  industrial  revolution  was  productive  of  colossal  for 
tunes  for  those  who  were  "captains  of  industry"  or  who 
speculated  successfully  in  the  stocks  and  bonds  of  industrial 
corporations.  Inequality  of  wealth  such  as  was  unknown  in 
the  early  days  of  the  republic  became  the  accepted  state  of 
society.  The  United  States  passed  through  the  millionaire 


FOUNDATIONS  OF  THE  MODERN  ERA  257 

era  into  the  multimillionaire  era  and  by  1900  emerged  into 
the  age  of  billionaires. 

While  a  comparative  few  were  amassing  enormous  riches, 
vast  numbers  of  men,  women  and  children  entered  the  fac 
tories  as  wage  earners,  and  the  foundations  were  laid  for  that 
most  difficult  of  all  modern  problems,  the  labor  problem. 
The  location  of  plants  at  strategic  commercial  points  was 
responsible  for  a  tremendous  movement  of  people  from  the 
country  into  the  great  industrial  centers  and  the  massing  of 
the  factory  workers  into  poor  quarters  and  slum  districts. 
As  industries  were  virtually  unregulated  by  law  until  the 
nineties,  the  situation  of  the  working  class  in  respect  to 
wages,  hours  and  conditions  of  labor  was  utterly  wretched. 
Since  the  government  at  this  period  was  unwilling  to  take 
aggressive  measures  for  mitigating  these  conditions,  the 
workingmen  were  forced  to  rely  upon  their  own  resources. 
Imitating  the  great  combinations  of  capital,  they  combined 
together  in  trade  unions  and  soon  sought  to  create  a  national 
alliance  of  all  workingmen  for  common  purposes.  The 
Knights  of  Labor  arose  in  the  late  sixties  and  ran  their 
checkered  career  until  the  middle  eighties.  Out  of  the  ruins 
of  this  organization  arose  the  American  Federation  of  Labor, 
which  continues  to  be  the  greatest  and  most  powerful  body 
of  organized  labor  in  the  United  States.  Efforts  were  made 
from  time  to  time  to  organize  the  laboring  class  politically; 
but  labor  parties  were  always  short-lived  and  never  attained 
any  marked  political  success.  The  country  became  torn 
periodically  by  tremendous  conflicts  between  capital  and 
labor,  involving  the  loss  of  countless  lives  and  millions  of 
dollars'  worth  of  property.  Finally  the  government  was 
forced  to  step  in  and,  by  legislation,  remove  some  of  the 
worst  evils  from  which  the  working  class  suffered.  Many 
injustices,  real  and  fancied,  remained,  however,  and  the 
accentuation  of  class  feeling  constitutes  today  the  most 


258  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

serious  obstacle  to  the  attainment  of  genuine  national  unity. 

Notwithstanding  the  accumulated  grievances  of  the  work 
ing  class  the  industrial  revolution  is  not  to  be  regarded  as  a 
calamity  for  the  mass  of  the  people.  The  final  outcome  has 
been  an  increase  in  the  number  of  persons  employed,  a  multi 
plication  of  the  productive  power  of  the  community,  an 
enormous  reduction  in  the  price  of  all  the  comforts  of  life, 
and  an  extension  of  the  range  of  human  enjoyments.  The 
drudgery  and  wasteful  toil  of  life  have  been  greatly  lessened. 
Wages  have  continued  to  advance  though  often  not  as  -rap 
idly  as  the  cost  of  living ;  the  advantages  of  education  have 
been  multiplied  and  extended  -  and  health  conditions  in  home 
and  factory  are  better  than  ever  before.  As  someone  has 
pointed  out,  the  average  workingman  can  enjoy  in  his  home 
lighting  undreamed  of  in  the  days  of  tallow  candles,  warmth 
beyond  the  power  of  the  old  smoky  soft-coal  grate,  kitchen 
conveniences  that  our  New  England  ancestors  would  prob 
ably  have  thought  sinful,  and  sanitary  conditions  and  con 
veniences  beyond  the  reach  of  the  wealthiest  man  even  half  a 
century  ago.  If  the  owner  of  the  poorest  tenement  house  in 
our  cities  today  were  to  install  the  kind  of  plumbing  that 
George  Washington  possessed,  he  would  promptly  be  locked 
up  as  a  menace  to  the  health  of  the  community. 

Large  scale  production  with  its  great  saving  of  labor  has 
made  it  possible  for  labor  unions  to  bring  about  a  reduction 
in  the  hours  of  daily  work.  Hence  people  have  leisure  for 
personal  enjoyment  previously  unknown.  The  trolley-car, 
the  automobile,  the  amusement  park  and  the  "movies"  have 
brought  rest  and  recreation  to  millions  of  people  who  in 
earlier  times  knew  only  toil  and  whose  pleasures  consisted 
chiefly  in  church  attendance,  neighborhood  gossip  and  alco 
holic  stimulants. 

The  intelligent  workingman  does  not  deny  these  palpable 
facts;  but  the  crux  of  the  problem,  as  he  sees  it,  is  his  belief 


FOUNDATIONS  OF  THE  MODERN  ERA  259 

that  the  worker  has  not  received  a  fair  share  of  the  enormous 
increase  of  wealth  which  has  taken  place  in  this  country 
largely  through  his  own  grinding  labor. 

in  v^ 

A  marked  characteristic  of  American  history  since  the 
Civil  War  has  been  the  development  of  new  diplomatic  in 
terests.  The  changed  direction  of  our  foreign  policy  has 
been  largely  a  consequence  of  the  transformation  of  the 
United  States  from  an  importing  nation  requiring  foreign 
capital  for  its  economic  development,  to  the  greatest  export 
ing  nation  of  the  world,  operating  in  large  degree  inde 
pendently  of  outside  financial  aid.  On  the  one  hand,  the 
vast  growth  of  farm  and  factory  production  has  demanded 
ample  foreign  markets;  and  on  the  other,  the  accumulation 
of  surplus  capital  has  sought  opportunity  for  overseas  invest 
ment.  The  attention  of  our  diplomats  inevitably  turned  to 
the  backward  and  undeveloped  regions  of  the  globe,  particu 
larly  to  those  portions  to  which  European  enterprise  had  not 
yet  penetrated.  These  materialistic  motives  found  quick 
response  in  the  traditional  sympathy  of  the  American  people 
for  less  favored  peoples  and  in  the  national  faith  in  the 
uplifting  influence  of  American  ideals  and  institutions. 

So  it  happened  that  American  foreign  policy  in  the  mod 
ern  period  has  been  chiefly  engaged  in  the  annexation  of 
islands  in  the  Pacific  Ocean,  the  promotion  of  trade  and 
investments  in  the  Far  East,  the  construction  of  an  inter- 
oceanic  canal,  and  the  fostering  of  commerce  with  Latin 
America.  These  new  impulses  reached  their  full  momentum 
at  the  turning  of  the  century,  when,  in  a  space  of  three  years, 
Hawaii,  Tutuila,  the  Philippines,  Guam  and  Porto  Rico  were 
annexed  ;  Cuba  was  converted  into  a  protectorate ;  the  United 
States  proclaimed  the  policy  of  an  "open  door"  for  foreign 
trade  in  China;  and  the  Hay-Pauncefote  treaty  cleared  the 


260  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

way  for  the  building  of  an  isthmian  canal  under  American 
control.  By  these  events  America  was  forced  to  issue  from 
her  chrysalis  of  isolation  and  take  her  place  as  a  world  power 
with  a  potential  voice  in  the  affairs  of  Europe,  Asia  and 
Africa. 

It  is  not  going  too  far  to  say  that  the  Monroe  Doctrine  to 
day  has  become  largely  an  economic  policy.  Formerly  the 
Monroe  Doctrine  was  wholly  political,  aiming  to  prevent  the 
further  extension  of  European  governmental  systems  to  the 
soil  of  the  New  World.  Purely  economic  operations  and 
engagements  were  unknown  to  it.  But,  as  Professor  Ogg 
has  pointed  out,  the  United  States  was  gradually  forced  to 
recognize  that  the  investment  of  foreign  capital  in  a  back 
ward  Latin  American  country  may  easily  lead  to  economic 
absorption  and  that  economic  absorption  is  likely  to  result  in 
political  control.  Hence  the  Monroe  Doctrine  as  we  know  it 
today  is  largely  concerned  with  converting  into  American 
protectorates  those  countries  whose  financial  laxness  might 
tempt  creditor  nations  to  intervene  in  their  affairs,  and  with 
discouraging  foreign  capitalists  and  corporations  from 
acquiring  lands  and  other  concessions  in  Latin  America  on 
such  a  scale  as  to  foreshadow  political  control. 

In  a  very  different  sense  the  United  States  has  contracted 
a  series  of  difficult  foreign  relations  through  the  invasion  of 
our  shores  by  great  hordes  of  immigrants.  The  alluring 
prospects  of  employment  and  wealth  opened  up  by  the  eco 
nomic  revolution  in  this  country  attracted  European  peasants 
in  unprecedented  numbers  to  our  farms  and  factories,  rail 
roads  and  mines.  Their  presence  has  yielded  its  benefits  as 
well  as  its  evil  results ;  but,  however  viewed,  modern  Ameri 
can  life  has  been  rendered  infinitely  more  complex  by  reason 
of  their  coming.  The  problem  of  the  assimilation  of  the 
alien  ranks  with  the  labor  problem  in  its  gravity  for  the 
future  welfare  of  America. 


FOUNDATIONS  OF  THE  MODERN  ERA  261 

IV 

But  the  basic  importance  of  the  economic  revolution  to  an 
understanding  of  modern  America  cannot  be  dismissed  with 
a  consideration  of  these  concrete  aspects  of  material  and 
political  development.  What  Mencken  has  termed,  in  sar 
donic  vein,  "the  whole,  gross,  glittering,  excessively  dynamic, 
infinitely  grotesque,  incredibly  stupendous  drama  of  Ameri 
can  life"  has  its  sources  in  the  new  economic  substructure  of 
American  society  of  the  last  sixty  years.  The  high  degree 
of  specialization  and  the  keen  competition  among  individuals, 
exacted  by  the  compulsions  of  modern  existence,  have  lent  a 
feverish  intensity  to  living.  Santayana  has  said  of  the  con 
temporary  American,  with  an  element  of  truth,  that  "All  his 
life  he  jumps  into  the  train  after  it  has  started,  and  jumps 
out  before  it  has  stopped,  and  never  once  gets  left  behind  or 
breaks  a  leg."  There  is  a  tendency  for  the  American  people 
to  live  on  the  latest  sensations  and  exhaust  themselves  with 
superficial  emotions.  The  "pursuit  of  happiness,"  proclaimed 
by  the  Declaration  of  Independence  as  an  inalienable  right, 
has  ceased  to  be  a  leisurely  and  beguiling  occupation  and  has 
become  a  frenzied  and  breathless  chase.  The  ceaseless 
activity  and  the  jaded  mental  condition  characteristic  of  the 
average  American  outside  of  business  hours  have  led  him  to 
value  brevity  and  hurry  above  all  other  virtues.  Symptoms 
of  this  state  of  mind  are  to  be  found  on  every  hand — in 
"short  orders"  in  the  restaurants,  vaudeville  in  the  theaters, 
headline  summaries  in  the  newspapers,  short  stories  in 
literature. 

The  prodigious  strides  made  by  science  in  the  modern 
period  and  the  demand  for  industrial  efficiency  have  placed  a 
premium  upon  the  cultivation  of  the  practical  and  the  actual 
in  all  departments  of  human  thought  and  endeavor.  In  the 
sphere  of  education  the  older  ideals  of  a  liberal  education 


262  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

have  been  forced  to  yield  to  the  demands  for  specialized  and 
technical  training.  Due  to  the  early  importance  of  farming 
in  our  national  economy,  agricultural  education  was  the  first 
of  the  vocational  subjects  to  be  taken  over  by  the  schools  and 
the  colleges.  In  the  eighties  the  high  schools  began  to  offer 
courses  in  manual  training,  business,  and  household  econ 
omy  ;  and  gradually  these  subjects  found  places  in  the  college 
curriculum.  Today,  we  are  told  on  high  authority,  our 
schools  are  no  longer  "mere  disciplinary  institutions  where 
drill  is  given  in  the  mastery  of  the  rudiments  of  knowledge" 
but  "institutions  of  democracy  calculated  to  train  for  useful 
service  in  the  office,  the  shop  and  the  home,  and  intended  to 
prepare  young  people  for  intelligent  participation  in  the 
increasingly  complex  social  and  political  life  of  our  demo 
cratic  society."  The  new  direction  and  ideals  of  education 
have  awakened  a  popular  interest  and  support  unknown  to 
those  simpler  times  when  a  man  who  had  mastered  the 
"three  R's"  could  cope  sufficiently  well  with  the  problems  of 
life. 

In  literature  the  romantic  school  typified  by  Cooper, 
Irving  and  Hawthorne  has  succumbed  to  the  realistic  art  of 
Ho  wells  and  James,  the  dialect  and  local  color  writing  of 
Harte  and  Mark  Twain,  and  the  sociological  fiction  of  Frank 
Norris  and  Upton  Sinclair.  Our  writers  perceived  the 
literary  possibilities  presented  by  the  new  America  and 
sought  to  interpret  and  photograph  the  multifold  aspects  of 
the  modern  scene.  An  amazing  new  literature  appeared, 
born  of  the  people,  for  the  people  and  by  the  people. 

The  same  influences  coursed  through  American  music. 
Before  the  Civil  War  there  was  very  little  appreciation  of 
music  even  by  cultivated  people.  That  great  conflict  was 
fought  by  soldiers  singing  songs,  most  of  which  had  been 
composed  in  the  Old  World.  Since  then,  music  has  been 
both  vulgarized  and  popularized.  The  principal  output  of 


FOUNDATIONS  OF  THE  MODERN  ERA  263 

American  composers  has  been  "popular  music,"  seeking 
however  crudely  to  express  the  new  meanings  and  energies 
of  American  life.  The  period  since  Appomattox  might  be 
divided  into  the  epoch  of  plantation  melodies  and  "coon 
songs,"  the  era  of  "ragtime,"  and  the  contemporary  age  of 
"jazz."  But  the  apostles  of  the  higher  forms  of  music  have 
had  no  reason  for  discouragement.  Although  the  output  of 
serious  American  music  has  been  comparatively  small  and 
often  imitative,  some  compositions  of  genuine  beauty  and 
individuality  have  been  produced,  notably  the  work  of 
Edward  MacDowell.  Every  large  city  today  has  its  symphony 
orchestra  and  music  courses ;  and  American  inventive  genius 
has,  by  means  of  the  phonograph,  carried  music  of  undying 
beauty  into  a  million  homes. 

In  the  field  of  history  the  social  point  of  view  has  become 
the  characteristic  mark  of  the  present  generation  of  his 
torians  ;  and  the  very  concept  of  an  "economic  interpretation 
of  history"  is  the  product  of  an  industrial  age.  Contem 
porary  philosophy  has  become  pragmatic  in  its  treatment  of 
ethics  and  naturalistic  in  dealing  with  the  problems  of  meta 
physics.  Religion  has  turned  from  the  contemplation  of 
theological  abstractions  and  is  seeking  to  apply  its  precepts  to 
the  stubborn  realities  of  modern  life,  or  else  to  base  its 
appeal  upon  the  assurance  of  physical  health  as  well  as 
spiritual  peace.  Even  the  conservative  spirit  of  the  law  has 
gradually  undergone  a  process  of  socialization  in  an  effort  to 
adjust  itself  to  living  social,  economic  and  political  facts; 
and  "mechanical  jurisprudence"  is  reluctantly  but  inevitably 
yielding  to  the  new  school  of  "sociological  jurisprudence." 

Perhaps  most  significant  of  all  is  the  new  political  philos 
ophy  which,  with  each  passing  decade,  has  gained  fresh 
converts  among  the  leaders  of  public  opinion.  The  former 
ideal  of  hisses  faire — the  right  of  individuals  to  compete 
unrestrictedly  with  each  other  without  governmental  regula- 


264  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

tion — was  well  adapted  to  the  conditions  prevailing  before 
the  economic  revolution,  when  land  and  natural  resources 
were  plentiful  and  cheap.  But  with  the  increasing  complexi 
ties  of  modern  life  the  feeling  has  grown  that  the  liberty  and 
opportunities  of  the  individual  can  be  properly  safeguarded 
only  by  the  protective  oversight  of  the  government.  Con 
ditions  in  the  United  States  have  not  reached  that  degree  of 
wretchedness  which  would  give  Socialism  or  Communism  a 
strong  popular  appeal ;  and  the  dominant  thought  of  America 
is  agreed  that  intelligent  social  control  furnishes  the  best 
preventive  of  ruthless  individualism,  on  the  one  hand,  and  of 
government  paternalism  on  the  other. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

The  great  arsenal  of  information  on  the  economic  transformation 
of  the  United  States  since  the  Civil  War  is  the  Report  of  the  United 
States  Industrial  Commission  (19  v.;  Washington,  1900-1902).  The 
final  volume  is  particularly  useful.  The  student,  however,  should 
not  overlook  the  detailed  study  made  by  David  A.  Wells  in  1889  of 
the  changes  of  the  preceding  quarter  of  a  century,  entitled  Recent 
Economic  Changes  and  Their  Effect  on  the  Production  and  Distribu 
tion  of  Wealth  and  the  Weil-Being  of  Society  (New  York).  Al 
though  the  revolutionary  character  cf  the  changes  is  fully  recognized 
in  both  of  these  works,  the  specific  term,  "economic  revolution," 
seems  to  have  been  first  used  by  Charles  A.  Beard  in  his  American 
Government  and  Politics  (New  York,  1910)  and  again  in  his  Con 
temporary  American  History,  1877-1913  (New  York,  1914).  The 
term  has  not  yet  won  general  acceptance  by  the  historians,  the  less 
accurate  one  of  "industrial  revolution"  being  ordinarily  employed. 

The  facts  of  the  economic  revolution  are  excellently  summarized 
in  Katharine  Coman's  The  Industrial  History  of  the  United  States 
(New  York,  1905),  pp.  265-343;  Ernest  Ludlow  Bogart's  The 
Economic  History  of  the  United  States  (New  York,  1907),  part  iv 
(especially  good)  ;  Emory  Richard  Johnson  and  others'  History  of 
Foreign  and  Domestic  Commerce  of  the  United  States  (2  v. ;  Wash 
ington,  1915),  vol.  i,  chap,  xv ;  Arthur  W.  Calhoun's  A  Social  His 
tory  of  the  American  Family  (3  v. ;  Cleveland,  1917-1919),  vol.  iii, 
chap,  iv;  and  Ellwood  P.  Cubberley's  Public  Education  in  the 
United  States  (Boston,  1919),  chap.  xi.  The  agricultural  phases  of 
the  revolution  have  been  studied  separately  by  Louis  Bernard 
Schmidt  in  his  article  "Some  Significant  Aspects  of  the  Agrarian 
Revolution  in  the  United  States"  in  the  Iowa  Journal  of  Politics 
and  History ,  vol.  xviii  (1920),  pp.  371-395. 


FOUNDATIONS  OF  THE  MODERN  ERA  265 

The  present  writer's  view  as  to  the  vital  relationship  of  the 
economic  revolution  to  an  understanding  of  all  aspects  of  modern 
American  life  and  society  was  presented  in  an  article  entitled  "The 
Problem  of  Teaching  Recent  American  History"  in  the  Historical 
Outlook,  vol.  xi  (1920),  pp.  352-355.  The  first  chapter  of  Charles 
Edward  Merriam's  American  Political  Ideas,  1865-1917  (New  York, 
1920)  is  a  brilliant  exposition  of  the  fundamental  factors  of  the 
period.  The  same  point  of  view  has  been  worked  out,  with  more  or 
less  conscious  intent,  in  Charles  A.  Beard's  Contemporary  American 
History,  1877-1913  (already  cited),  chaps,  ii,  iii,  iv,  ix;  Frederic  L. 
Paxson's  The  New  Nation  (Boston,  1915),  especially  chap,  vi ;  Paul 
L.  Haworth's  The  United  States  in  Our  Own  Times,  1865-1920  (New 
York,  1920),  especially  chap,  x;  and  best  of  all  in  Charles  Ramsdell 
Lingley's  Since  the  Civil  War  (New  York,  1920),  chaps,  iii,  ix,  xi, 
xiv,  xxii. 

The  most  extensive  treatment  of  the  modern  period  of  American 
history  to  1917  may  be  found  in  vols.  22-27  of  The  American  Nation: 
a  History  (Albert  Bushnell  Hart,  ed. ;  New  York,  1905-1918), 
written  by  William  Archibald  Dunning,  Edwin  Erie  Sparks,  Davis 
R.  Dewey,  John  H.  Latane  and  Frederic  Austin  Ogg.  These 
volumes  give  attention  to  social  and  economic  factors  as  well  as 
to  political,  constitutional  and  diplomatic  developments. 

The  unity  of  the  recent  period  is  being  clearly  recognized  by 
students  of  the  cultural  and  intellectual  history  of  the  United  States. 
Of  such  volumes  the  following  are  particularly  valuable :  Charles 
F.  Thwing's  A  History  of  Education  in  the  United  States  Since  the 
Civil  War  (Boston,  1910)  ;  Fred  Lewis  Pattee's  A  History  of 
American  Literature  Since  1870  (New  York,  1917)  ;  Ellwood  P. 
Cubberley's  Public  Education  in  the  United  States  (already  cited,), 
chaps,  xi-xv;  Charles  Edward  Merriam's  American  Political  Ideas, 
1865-1917  (already  cited)  ;  and  James  Melvin  Lee's  History  of 
American  Journalism  (Boston,  1917),  pp.  317-450. 


CHAPTER  XII 

THE  RIDDLE  OF  THE  PARTIES 


With  the  ratification  of  the  nineteenth  amendment  shortly 
before  the  presidential  election  of  1920,  several  millions  of 
women  received  the  right  to  use  the  ballot  for  the  first  time. 
Gloomy  predictions  had  been  made,  time  and  again,  that  this 
extension  of  the  suffrage  boded  ill  for  the  welfare  of  the 
nation  because  of  the  inability  of  the  feminine  mind  to  com 
prehend  political  matters.  The  election  has  receded  far 
enough  into  the  past  for  us  to  see  now,  with  clearer  vision, 
that  the  chief  obstacle  in  the  way  of  intelligent  voting  by  the 
women  was  not  their  fancied  mental  inferiority  in  political 
matters  but  rather  the  incapacity  of  the  political  parties  to 
make  themselves  intelligible  to  the  women. 

What  was  so  dramatically  revealed  in  the  campaign  of 
1920  was  not  a  new  thing  in  our  recent  political  history. 
Every  year  has  witnessed  the  entry  of  a  million  or  more 
new  partners  into  our  great  democracy — young  men  newly 
attaining  the  age  of  twenty-one,  and  foreign-born  citizens 
fresh  from  their  final  naturalization  papers.  These  new 
voters  have  all  been  confronted  with  the  same  need  to  align 
themselves  with  parties  that  faced  the  huge  battalions  of 
women  voters  in  1920. 

The  importance  of  making  a  reasoned  decision  need  not  be 
argued  in  a  country  in  which  the  motive  power  of  govern 
ment  is  generated  by  parties.  Such  a  choice  would  not  be, 

266 


THE  RIDDLE  OF  THE  PARTIES  267 

and  should  not  be,  the  same  for  all  voters ;  but  it  is  supremely 
important  that  the  selection,  whatever  it  be,  should  be  made 
upon  the  basis  of  unbiased  information  and  of  an  indepen 
dent  judgment  of  the  principles  and  policies  for  which  each 
party  stands.  Hence  if  our  government  is  to  be  motivated  by 
the  collective  intelligence  of  the  citizens,  it  follows  that  every 
facility  should  be  afforded  voters  to  discover  the  truth  about 
the  political  parties  through  which  they  must  act. 

Whatever  may  have  been  true  of  certain  periods  of  the 
past,  every  new  voter  who  has  sought  to  cast  a  conscientious 
ballot  in  recent  elections  will  agree  that  our  democratic 
methods  of  government  have  failed  at  this  critical  point. 
There  seems  to  be  a  conspiracy,  not  of  silence  but  of  volu 
bility,  to  conceal  the  real  meaning  of  parties.  Efforts  of 
intelligent  citizens  to  penetrate  the  darkness  and  confusion 
surrounding  party  meanings  have  too  frequently  caused 
them  to  react  in  disgust  or  in  consequent  indifference  there 
after  to  the  political  life  of  the  nation ;  or  else  the  individual, 
in  lieu  of  anything  better,  has  allowed  his  party  loyalty  to  be 
dictated  by  the  social  pressures  of  the  community  in  which  he 
lives  or  by  the  inherited  prejudices  of  his  clan. 

One  of  the  most  alarming  tendencies  of  contemporary 
times  in  the  United  States  has  been  the  steady  decline  in  the 
proportion  of  citizens  who  perform  their  periodical  functions 
at  the  polls.  Not  only  is  this  true  in  state  and  local  elections 
but  in  national  elections  as  well.  This  tendency  has  been 
most  marked  since  the  McKinley-Bryan  campaign  of  1896; 
and  its  lowest  point  was  reached  in  the  last  presidential  con 
test  (1920)  when  about  half  of  the  citizens  entitled  to  vote 
went  to  the  polls.  Many  factors  have  contributed  to  this 
phenomenon,  but  an  important  element  has  undoubtedly  been 
the  failure  of  the  major  parties  to  convince  the  voters  that 
they  represent  clearly  differentiated  bodies  of  opinion. 

The  mental  confusion  of  the  average  man  is  readily  under- 


268  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

stood  when  many  signs  lead  him  to  believe  that  there  are,  in 
fact,  no  essential  differences  between  the  major  parties. 
Thus,  prior  to  the  national  conventions  of  the  presidential 
campaign  of  1920,  the  New  York  World,  a  traditional  Demo 
cratic  organ  of  vast  influence,  announced  its  readiness  to 
support  Herbert  Hoover  for  president  regardless  of  which 
party  might  nominate  him.  And  the  Saturday  Evening  Post 
with  its  mammoth  reading  public  called  upon  the  great 
parties  to  join  in  making  Mr.  Hoover  their  presidential 
choice.  Mr.  Hoover  at  that  time  was  engaged  in  sternly 
disavowing  that  he  was  a  party  man  in  any  orthodox  sense 
although  he  subsequently  reached  the  conclusion  that  he  was 
a  member  of  the  Republican  party.  The  impression  has 
undoubtedly  won  wide  acceptance  in  the  country  that  the 
great  parties  are  like  two  armies  that  have  been  sitting  oppo 
site  each  other  for  so  long  a  time  that  they  have  forgotten 
the  original  cause  of  their  quarrel. 

ii 

How,  then,  can  one  learn  what  the  parties  stand  for? 
Party  platforms  originated  back  in  Jackson's  day  for  the 
express  purpose  of  clarifying  such  matters  for  the  voter  in 
advance  of  the  election ;  but  since  that  time,  they  have  tended 
to  degenerate  into  collections  of  pleasant  generalities  that 
are  more  likely  to  bewilder  than  enlighten  the  inquiring  voter. 
The  popular  attitude  toward  them  has  become  one  of  indif 
ference  or  cynicism,  because  of  the  proneness  of  a  party  to 
straddle  the  principal  issues  and  its  likelihood  of  disregarding 
its  other  pledges  should  it  succeed  in  winning  the  election. 
Indeed  it  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  the  chief  function  of  a 
party  platform  today  is  one  of  internal  importance.  For 
reasons  that  will  be  noted  later,  the  typical  platform  is  a 
treaty  of  amity  designed  to  compose  differences  among  dis 
cordant  elements  of  the  party  for  the  duration  of  the  cam- 


THE  RIDDLE  OF  THE  PARTIES  269 

paign  and  to  permit  the  party  to  present  a  united  front 
against  the  common  enemy. 

One  reads  the  platforms  in  vain  for  those  statements  of 
fundamental  differences  and  tendencies  which  might  consti 
tute  a  clarion  call  to  a  citizen  to  identify  the  public  welfare 
with  the  one  party  rather  than  the  other.  When  such  at 
tempts  at  definition  are  made,  as  in  the  platforms  of  1908, 
the  promise  falls  far  short  of  fulfillment.  It  may  be  helpful 
for  the  voter  to  learn  from  the  Republican  platform  that 
"The  trend  of  Democracy  is  toward  socialism,  while  the 
Republican  party  stands  for  a  wise  and  regulated  individual 
ism";  but  what  is  he  to  think  upon  discovering  from  the 
Democratic  platform  that  "The  Democratic  party  is  the 
champion  of  equal  rights  and  opportunities  to  all;  the 
Republican  party  is  the  party  of  privilege  and  private 
monopoly"  ? 

Next  to  these  official  declarations  of  party  belief,  the  voter 
is  forced  to  turn  to  partisan  newspapers  and  campaign  ora 
tors  for  the  information  he  seeks.  Here  again  he  encounters 
difficulties :  who  would  trust  a  lover  for  an  unbiased  and 
dispassionate  opinion  of  his  sweetheart?  A  copy  of  the 
London  Chronicle  of  May  8,  1766,  yellowed  with  age,  ex 
presses  a  conviction  that  bears  the  fresh  impress  of  truth 
today,  so  far  as  party  liegemen  are  concerned:  "Party  is  a 
fever  that  robs  the  wretch  under  its  influence  of  common 
sense,  common  decency,  and  sometimes  common  honesty;  it 
subjects  reason  to  the  caprices  of  fancy,  and  misrepresents 
objects;  ...  we  blame  and  pity  bigotry  and  enthusiasm  in 
religion ;  .  .  .  are  party  principles  less  reprehensible,  that,  in 
a  worse  cause,  are  apt  to  intoxicate  and  disorder  the  brain, 
and  pervert  the  understanding?"  The  attitude  of  John 
Randolph  of  Roanoke  toward  the  Whig  party  of  his  time 
may  be  taken  to  represent  the  viewpoint  of  the  orthodox 
party  man  toward  the  opposition  party.  The  Whigs,  de- 


270  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

clared  Randolph,  have  exactly  seven  principles,  "five  loaves 
and  two  fishes."  Better  for  the  voter  than  one  partisan 
organ  are  two  newspapers  representing  opposite  sides  of  the 
discussion ;  but  the  determination  of  the  truth  on  the  basis  of 
such  evidence  would  require  the  faculties  of  an  expert  in 
historical  research  and  the  wisdom  of  a  Solomon. 

Perhaps  in  particular  cases  there  may  be  other  and  less 
obvious  channels  of  information  open  to  the  diligent  seeker ; 
but  in  final  analysis  the  conclusion  is  unavoidable  that  th£-^ 
only  way  to  ascertain  the  truth  about  party  principles  is  the  X 
thorny  path  of  finding  out  how  the  party  originated,  what 
influences  shaped  its  development,  and  what  seem  to  be  its 
present  sympathies  and  impulses.  In  other  words,  if  polit 
ical  parties  are,  in  any  degree  at  all,  coherent  and  developing 
bodies  of  opinion,  it  is  not  wise  to  pass  judgment  on  a  party 
from  the  cross-section  of  its  policies  that  is  exposed  to  one's 
gaze  in  the  heat  and  smoke  of  a  particular  political  cam 
paign.  Only  from  an  historical  view,  properly  understood, 
can  one  arrive  at  a  well-considered  opinion  concerning  the 
present  fitness  and  future  development  of  parties. 

in 

The  Republican  party  is  the  younger  of  the  two  major 
parties,  having  been  founded  within  the  memory  of  many 
men  still  living.  It  took  form  in  the  fall  of  1854  as  a  fusion 
of  the  anti-slavery  elements  of  the  Whig  and  Democratic 
parties  with  the  preexisting  Free  Soilers  or  "Free  Demo 
crats."  Its  fundamental  tenet  was  the  non-extension  of 
slavery  beyond  the  southern  states  in  which  the  institution 
was  deeply  rooted;  but  it  waged  battle  with  the  "Slave 
Power"  in  all  the  efforts  of  the  latter  to  dictate  the  policy  of 
the  government.  The  new  party  quickly  attracted  into  its 
fold  the  wage-earners  of  the  northern  cities  and  most  of  the 
newly-arrived  immigrants,  not  only  because  of  the  inherent 


THE  RIDDLE  OF  THE  PARTIES  271 

opposition  of  slave  labor  and  free  labor  but,  more  specifically, 
because  of  the  plan  of  the  "Slave  Power"  to  discourage  free 
settlement  in  the  western  territories  by  the  establishment  of 
the  slavery  system  there.  The  issue  was  made  unmistakably 
clear  to  the  common  people  of  the  North  when  in  June,  1860, 
President  Buchanan,  acting  under  southern  influence,  vetoed 
a  homestead  bill  that  had  originated  in  the  Republican 
House  of  Representatives.  Through  its  generous  idealism 
the  party  also  won  a  wide  support  among  the  church-goers 
of  the  North  as  well. 

The  creed  of  the  new  Republican  party  was  a  radical,  if 
not  a  revolutionary,  one.  Its  great  leaders,  William  H. 
Seward  and  Abraham  Lincoln,  had  both  been  guilty  of  public 
utterances  that  were  regarded  at  the  time  as  little  short  of 
incendiary,  Seward  when  he  declared  that  there  was  "a 
higher  law  than  the  Constitution,"  and  Lincoln  when  he 
charged  the  chief  justice  of  the  United  States  Supreme  Court 
with  having  knowingly  engaged  in  a  great  pro-slavery  con 
spiracy  to  extend  slavery  into  all  the  territories.  The  finan 
cial  interests  of  the  East  viewed  the  growth  of  the  new  party 
with  alarm;  and  on  the  eve  of  the  Lincoln  campaign  of  1860, 
it  was  reported  that  William  B.  Astor  had  contributed  one 
million  dollars  to  encompass  the  defeat  of  the  Republicans  in 
New  York. 

The  new  party  was  successful  in  winning  the  presidency 
within  six  years  of  its  birth,  principally  because  the  ranks  of 
the  opposition  party  were  sundered  in  the  campaign.  By 
the  time  President  Lincoln  was  inaugurated  in  1861,  most  of 
the  slaveholding  states  had  already  declared  themselves  out 
side  of  the  Union ;  and  this  new  party,  inexperienced,  hetero 
geneous  and  unaware  of  its  own  potential  strength,  was 
confronted  with  the  most  stupendous  task  that  a  political 
party  has  ever  had  to  undertake  in  American  history.  How 
the  Lincoln  administration  mobilized  the  spiritual  and  mate- 


272  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

rial  resources  of  the  North,  preserved  the  Union  and  abol 
ished  slavery  is  part  of  a  larger  story  than  the  history  of  a 
single  party;  but  the  consequences  were  pregnant  with  sig 
nificance  for  the  later  development  of  the  Republican  party. 

The  very  completeness  of  the  success  attained  by  the 
Republicans  in  carrying  through  their  anti-slavery  program 
became  the  party's  greatest  menace  at  the  close  of  the  war. 
With  the  destruction  of  slavery  and  the  "Slave  Power/' 
there  was  no  logical  reason  for  the  continuance  of  the  party 
of  Lincoln  and  Seward,  unless  new  and  vital  issues  of  per 
manent  importance  should  be  added  to  the  party  creed. 
How  was  the  party  to  insure  self-preservation  ?  The  task  of 
reconstructing  the  South  and  securing  the  rights  of  the 
freedmen  was  a  direct  consequence  of  the  war  policy  of  the 
Republicans ;  and  for  several  years  after  the  war  their  ener 
gies  were  largely  absorbed  in  dealing  with  this  complex  and 
unprecedented  problem.  Meantime,  mute  powerful  forces, 
set  in  motion  by  the  economic  revolution  through  which  the 
country  was  then  passing,  were  preparing  to  supply  the  party 
with  the  badly  needed  new  policies. 

Contrary  to  a  widely  held  opinion  today,  no  national 
Republican  platform  had  ever  declared  for  a  protective  tariff 
prior  to  1872,  save  only  the  platform  of  1860  when  a  delib 
erate  political  play  was  made  to  capture  the  support  of  the 
iron  districts  of  Pennsylvania.  Nevertheless,  the  Republi 
cans  had  been  forced  to  enact  high  protective  tariffs  as  a  war 
revenue  measure;  and  under  shelter  of  these  enactments  a 
new  and  mighty  manufacturing  class  had  come  into  existence. 
The  manufacturers,  the  railroad  enterprisers  and  the  finan 
cial  interests  generally  sought  refuge  in  the  dominant  party, 
demanded  that  protection  be  continued  as  a  permanent  policy 
of  the  government  and  that  other  energetic  measures  be 
adopted  to  foster  the  material  development  of  the  nation. 
The  nationalistic  temper  of  the  Republican  party,  born  of  the 


THE  RIDDLE  OF  THE  PARTIES  273 


Civil  War,  lent  a  certain  idealistic  tinge  to  all  such  demands ; 
and  from  1868  on,  the  party  platforms  began  to  reflect, 
pretty  faithfully,  the  ideals  and  aims  of  the  dominant  eco 
nomic  interests  of  the  age.  The  great  tenets  of  Republican-  V 
ism  during  the  remaining  years  of  the  century  became  such 
questions  as  the  protective  tariff  and  "sound  money,"  and  in 
general  a  reluctance  to  cramp  or  curb  the  processes  of  busi 
ness  enterprise.  The  party  had  thus  passed  from  a  party  of  * 
radical  humanitarianism  to  a  party  of  business  conservatism. 
But  the  almost  uninterrupted  success  of  the  Republicans 
for  many  years  following  the  war  cannot  be  accounted  for 
solely  by  the  new  economic  affiliations  of  the  party.  The 
party  had  won  a  deep  and  abiding  hold  on  the  affections  of 
the  people  of  the  North  because,  as  it  seemed  to  many,  it  had 
been  the  instrument  of  Providence  in  saving  the  nation  in  its 
time  of  trial  and  stress.  The  political  thinking  of  the  gen 
eration  which  had  taken  part  in  the  war  was  dominated  by 
that  great  crisis;  and  to  the  minds  of  many  northerners  it 
was  nothing  short  of  disloyalty  to  the  flag  to  vote  anything 
but  the  straight  Republican  ticket.  For  twenty-five  years 
following  the  war,  Republican  platforms  opened  with  im 
passioned  reminders  of  the  past  glories  of  the  party;  and 
campaign  orators  of  the  party  lost  no  chance  to  assail  the 
opposition  party  as  traitors  in  the  late  war.  In  political  par 
lance  such  manoeuvres  were  called  "waving  the  bloody 
shirt" ;  and  the  effectiveness  of  this  practice  was  heightened 
by  the  generous  bids  for  the  soldier  vote  which  the  Republi 
cans  made  through  pension  legislation.  These  emotional 
appeals  furnished  Republican  leaders  with  a  means  of 
diverting  public  attention  at  times  when  the  party  was  guilty 
of  bad  government  and  made  it  possible  to  develop  almost 
undisturbed  their  new  economic  policies.  James  G.  Elaine, 
one  of  the  great  party  chieftains  of  the  period,  is  an  example 
of  a  man  who  never  tired  of  "waving  the  bloody  shirt,"  but 


174  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

his  political  integrity  has  been  forever  clouded  in  American 
history  by  his  dubious,  if  not  illicit,  relations,  while  in  public 
position,  with  railroad  corporations. 

IV 

Let  us  now  turn  aside  from  the  Republican  party  as  that 
great  organization  had  developed  by  the  closing  years  of  the 
nineteenth  century  and  consider  the  record  of  its  chief  rival, 
the  Democratic  party.  The  history  of  the  Democratic  party 
may,  in  a  sense,  be  said  to  be  coextensive  with  that  of  the 
Constitution,  although  in  its  early  years  the  party  was  as 
often  called  Republican  as  Democratic.  It  made  its  appear 
ance  in  Washington's  administration  as  a  protest  against  the 
aristocratic  and  centralizing  tendencies  of  the  Federalist 
party  then  in  power.  Under  the  leadership  of  Thomas 
Jefferson  it  gathered  to  itself  the  support  of  the  agricultural 
interest — northern  farmers,  southern  planters  and  western 
pioneers — and  in  the  fourth  presidential  election  (1800)  it 
swept  the  Federalists  into  a  defeat  from  which  they  never 
recovered.  For  the  first  sixty  years  of  the  nineteenth  cen 
tury  the  party  dominated  the  national  political  scene  and  was 
even  more  continuously  in  power  than  the  Republicans  have 
been  since  then. j  f  Under  its  second  great  leader,  Andrew 
Jackson,  the  party  received  a  new  impulse  toward  democ 
racy  ;  so  that  it  has  been  said  that  Jefferson  stood  for  govern 
ment  "of  the  people  and  for  the  people"  while  Jackson  added 
"by  the  people." 

Shortly  after  Jackson's  retirement,  the  party  entered  upon 
a  new  phase  of  its  development  when  it  fell  under  the  con 
trol  of  its  southern  leaders  and  became  devoted  to  the  ad 
vancement  of  pro-slavery  interests.  Thus  it  happened  that 
in  the  twenty-year  period  before  the  outbreak  of  the  Civil 
War  the  Democrats  insensibly  came  to  lay  less  emphasis  on 
popular  rights  and  to  stress  increasingly  doctrines  and  prin- 


THE  RIDDLE  OF  THE  PARTIES  275 

ciples  which  would  promote  and  entrench  the  prosperity  of 
the  cotton  capitalists.  The  secession  movement  of  1860-1861 
was  engineered  by  southern  Democratic  leaders ;  and  the  out 
break  of  the  war  saw  the  northern  Democracy  sadly  divided 
among  those  who  frankly  joined  the  Republicans  in  a  whole 
hearted  support  of  the  Lincoln  administration,  those  who 
continued  the  party  organization  on  a  program  of  criticism 
of  the  conduct  of  the  war,  and  those  who  sought  to  commit 
the  party  to  a  policy  of  immediate  peace  at  any  cost.  It  was 
to  the  last  group  that  the  name  "Copperheads"  properly 
applied;  but  in  the  public  mind  the  whole  party  became 
inseparably  identified  with  the  doctrine  of  disloyalty  and 
disunionism. 

If  the  close  of  the  Civil  War  raised  a  problem  of  self- 
perpetuation  for  the  Republicans,  the  situation  of  the  Demo 
crats  was  infinitely  more  difficult.  Disorganized  and  leader- 
less,  its  ante  bellum  issues  obsolete,  discredited  in  the  North 
by  its  war  record,  its  southern  supporters  largely  disfran 
chised,  the  party  faced  dissolution,  or  else  must  pin  its  faith 
to  its  ability  to  profit  by  the  mistakes  of  the  self-confident 
Republicans.  The  next  twenty  years  constituted  the  most 
critical  period  in  Democratic  history.  That  picturesque 
Democrat  Henry  Watterson,  who  knew  these  times  as  an 
actor  in  them,  wrote  many  years  later  of  "the  ancient  label 
of  a  Democracy  worn  by  a  riffraff  of  opportunists,  Jeffer- 
sonion  principles  having  gone  quite  to  seed."  The  remark 
able  thing  is  that  the  party  managed  to  survive ;  and  for  this 
miracle  the  Republican  party  may,  in  very  large  degree,  be 
held  responsible. 

In  the  first  place,  the  reconstruction  policy  of  the  Republi 
cans  affronted  and  humiliated  the  southerners,  who  bitterly 
resented  carpetbag  misrule  and  negro  ascendancy  at  a  time 
when  the  natural  leaders  of  the  native  white  population  were 
disfranchised  by  federal  enactment.  As  the  states  one  after 


276  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

the  other  recovered  their  full  political  rights,  their  ante 
bellum  antipathy  for  the  Republican  party  was  unutterably 
deepened  by  angry  memories  of  the  reconstruction  period. 
The  southern  whites  promptly  deprived  the  negroes  of  the 
suffrage;  and  the  ex-Confederate  states  r centered  national 
politics  as  a  solidly  Democratic  section.  Hence  the  "Solid 
South"  constituted  a  substantial  nucleus  about  which  the 
Democrats  of  the  North  might  expect  to  rebuild  their  party. 
It  meant,  for  instance,  in  the  election  of  1880  ninety-five 
electoral  votes,  out  of  a  total  of  three  hundred  and  sixty-nine, 
which  the  party  could  secure  for  its  candidate  without  an 
effort  and  irrespective  of  the  issues  at  stake.1  To  this  irre 
ducible  minimum  might  ordinarily  be  added  the  electoral 
votes  of  the  other  ex-slave  states,  Missouri,  Kentucky, 
Maryland  and  Delaware,  amounting  in  1880  to  thirty-five. 

Furthermore,  the  overconfidence  of  the  Republicans  in 
their  national  administration  furnished  excellent  opportuni 
ties  for  the  Democratic  minority.  The  presidency  of  Gen 
eral  Grant  was  marked  by  a  series  of  scandals  and  revelations 
of  corruption  which  involved  many  high  officials  of  the  gov 
ernment.  Republican  mistakes  spelled  Democratic  oppor 
tunity.  The  Democrats  took  advantage  of  the  situation  to 
nominate  Samuel  J.  Tilden,  who  had  won  a  reputation  for 
reform  in  New  York  politics ;  and  supported  by  a  widespread 
popular  dissatisfaction,  they  almost  succeeded  in  electing 
him  in  the  campaign  of  1876.  Warned  by  this  experience, 
the  Republicans  became  more  cautious  in  the  type  of  candi 
dates  they  nominated  and  in  their  conduct  in  office;  and 
Democratic  fortunes  again  ebbed  until  1884  when  the  Repub 
lican  organization,  in  defiance  of  the  protests  of  Theodore 
Roosevelt  and  other  young  leaders  of  the  party,  offered 
James  G.  Elaine  as  their  presidential  nominee.  The  Demo- 

1  The  first  break  in  the  Solid  South  came  in  1920  when  Tennessee  gave  its 
electoral  vote  to  Harding. 


THE  RIDDLE  OF  THE  PARTIES  277 

crats  gleefully  revived  their  tactics  of  eight  years  before,  and 
nominated  Grover  Cleveland,  the  reform  governor  of  New 
York,  on  a  platform  which,  save  for  its  destructive  criticism 
of  the  record  of  the  Republicans,  differed  in  no  vital  respect 
from  the  platform  of  the  opposition  party. 

This  time  the  Democrats  were  successful;  and  Cleveland 
found  himself  president  of  a  party  whose  "cardinal  princi 
ples,"  as  he  himself  confessed,  had  in  recent  years  been 
"relegated  to  the  rear  and  expediency  substituted  as  the  hope 
of  success."  To  Cleveland  fell  the  choice  of  continuing  this 
course  of  vacillation  and  opportunism,  or  of  endowing  the 
party  with  a  constructive  fighting  program.  To  a  man  of 
Cleveland's  uncompromising  characteristics  only  the  latter 
course  was  possible.  Before  his  first  term  was  completed,  he 
had  definitely  committed  the  party  to  the  principle  of  a  rev 
enue  tariff  although  Democratic  policy  on  the  tariff  had  been 
ill-defined  since  the  war  or  even  inclined  to  protectionism. 
He  had  courted  the  enmity  of  the  old-soldier  element  by  his 
dogged  determination  to  eliminate  laxness  and  fraud  in  the 
granting  of  pensions ;  and  in  general  he  had  stood  for  econ 
omy  in  governmental  expenditures.  Cleveland  occupied  the 
same  relationship  to  the  party  after  the  Civil  War  that 
Jefferson  and  Jackson  had,  in  turn,  in  the  earlier  history  of 
the  party.  The  Democrats  entered  the  campaign  of  1888  as 
a  party  regenerated,  as  indeed  it  was.  Although  Cleveland 
was  defeated  on  the  basis  of  the  new  issues,  he  was  splen 
didly  vindicated  four  years  later  when  the  people  returned 
him  and  his  party  to  the  control  of  the  government. 


A  new  era — the  present  era — opened  in  the  history  of  the 
Republican  and  Democratic  parties  about  1896  or  1900. 
Prior  to  that  time  neither  party  had  shown  any  primary 
concern  for  the  welfare  of  the  wage-earners  or  the  farmers 


278  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

or  the  small  business  men.  Neither  party  had  advocated 
policies  that  were  designed,  first  and  foremost,  to  better  the 
conditions  of  those  ordinary  men  and  women  who  compose 
the  great  bulk  of  the  people.  Party  politics  had  been  largely 
shaped  by  the  tugs  and  pressures  of  the  transforming  eco 
nomic  life  of  the  nation.  "In  the  encouragement  of  the 
investment  of  capital,"  so  William  Howard  Taft  tells  us, 
"we  nearly  transferred  complete  political  power  to  those  who 
controlled  corporate  wealth,  and  we  were  in  danger  of  a 
plutocracy."  While  these  influences  were  chiefly  felt  by  the 
party  which  was  in  almost  continuous  control  during  the 
period,  the  Democratic  party  by  no  means  escaped  them. 
Both  parties  ordinarily  acted  on  the  assumption  that  the 
welfare  of  the  toiling  masses  would  automatically  follow 
from  the  prosperity  of  the  manufacturers  and  financiers. 

Although  old  party  leaders  constantly  minimized  the 
amount  of  economic  distress  and  social  discontent  caused  by 
the  rapid  industrial  development,  the  less  fortunate  classes 
had  sought,  from  time  to  time,  to  voice  their  protests  through 
special  parties  organized  for  the  purpose.  These  parties 
were  invariably  unpromising  and  short-lived  until  in  1892 
when  an  upheaval  of  angry  farmers  created  the  People's 
party  and  polled  more  than  one  million  votes  in  the  presiden 
tial  election,  a  greater  number  than  the  difference  between 
the  total  votes  of  the  Democratic  and  Republican  candidates. 
The  Populists  declared  in  their  platform  that  they  were  not 
to  be  deceived  by  "the  struggles  of  the  two  great  political 
parties  for  power  and  plunder"  during  the  last  quarter- 
century  nor  by  their  more  recent  "uproar  of  a  sham  battle 
over  the  tariff" ;  and  they  proclaimed  that  the  well-being  of 
the  "plain  people"  was  bottomed  upon  the  adoption  of  the 
free  and  unlimited  coinage  of  silver  at  the  ratio  of  sixteen 
to  one. 

Now,  "free  silver"  is  a  problem  of  higher  economics  whose 


THE  RIDDLE  OF  THE  PARTIES  279 

implications  were  no  better  understood  in  the  nineties  by  the 
verbose  controversialists  of  either  side  than  they  are  by  the 
average  person  today.  Certainly  the  issue  represented  no 
reasoned  conviction  on  the  part  of  the  untutored  "plain 
people"  who  saw  in  it  their  great  hope  of  economic  redemp 
tion.  For  them  it  signified  something  infinitely  more :  it  was 
a  symbol,  a  Merlin's  wand,  with  which  to  destroy  the 
iniquitous  power  of  "Wall  Street"  and  "Big  Business"  in 
the  national  government.  Thus,  "free  silver,"  however  ill- 
conceived  the  issue  may  have  been,  represented  the  first 
stentorian  demand  for  a  consideration  of  homely  and  purely 
human  interests  in  national  politics. 

Since  the  injection  of  this  disturbing  spirit  into  the  politi 
cal  arena,  party  politics  in  this  country  has  undergone  a 
profound  change.  Fearful  of  the  vote-getting  strength  of 
the  new  issue,  the  Democratic  party  under  the  leadership  of 
William  Jennings  Bryan  declared  for  "free  silver"  in  their 
platform  of  1896,  although  Cleveland  and  many  other  eastern 
Democrats  temporarily  left  the  party  rather  than  lend  their 
countenance  to  the  doctrine.  A  mighty  campaign  followed ; 
and  by  the  election  of  McKinley  the  issue  in  its  temporary 
and  exigent  form  was  forever  discredited.  But  its  living 
spirit  had  found  a  lodging  place  in  the  national  councils  of 
both  parties. 

By  Bryan  the  new  impulses  were  transmuted  and  extended 
and  enriched  until  they  embraced  all  varieties  of  reforms 
that  tended  to  a  broader  recognition  of  human  rights  in 
government.  The  Republican  organization  yielded  more 
slowly  to  the  new  influences ;  but  by  the  accident  of  McKin- 
ley's  death  in  1901,  a  man  came  into  the  presidency  whose 
instincts  responded  strongly  to  the  need  of  ameliorating  the 
conditions  of  the  masses  and  who  popularized  the  new 
gospel.  Under  the  inspiration  of  Bryan  and  Roosevelt,  a 
group  of  young  leaders  sprang  up  in  each  party,  demanding 


280  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

the  destruction  of  "Special  Privilege"  and  a  larger  participa 
tion  by  the  people  in  the  control  of  government.  These  new 
tendencies  were  bitterly  resisted  by  the  older  leadership. 
Cleveland  and  his  friends  denounced  the  "Bryanization"  of 
the  Democratic  party.  "Standpat"  Republicans  sneered  at 
the  "philosophy  of  failure"  and  fought  the  progressive  ten 
dencies  at  every  turn.  Both  parties  were  plunged  into  de 
structive  factional  warfare,  the  progressive  wings  battling 
with  the  conservative  elements  for  the  direction  of  party 
policy,  although  the  force  of  tradition  has  usually  been 
strong  enough  to  enable  the  party  organization  to  maintain 
a  united  front  on  election  day.  These  internal  differences 
constitute  the  most  striking  characteristics  of  party  politics 
today,  and  furnish  the  chief  element  of  confusion  in  any 
attempt  to  arrive  at  the  significance  of  the  old  parties. 

The  division  between  the  progressives  and  conservatives 
within  each  party  may  be  likened  to  a  seesaw,  one  end 
being  up  at  one  time  and  the  other  at  another ;  and  when  one 
end  of  the  Republican  seesaw  is  high,  a  train  of  influences  is 
set  in  motion  which  usually  causes  the  opposite  end  of  the 
Democratic  seesaw  to  rise,  and  vice  versa.  A  hasty  review 
of  past  elections  will  demonstrate  the  truth  of  this  statement. 
In  1900  the  conservative  McKinley  on  the  Republican  ticket 
opposed  the  progressive  Democratic  candidate  Bryan.  In 
1904  the  progressive  Republican  Roosevelt  was  nominated 
against  the  conservative  Democrat  Parker.  The  conserva 
tive  Republican  Taft  battled  in  1908  with  the  progressive 
Bryan.  Four  years  later  the  internecine  quarrel  in  the 
Republican  party  reached  the  breaking-point,  and  the  two 
factions  were  no  longer  willing  to  live  under  the  same  roof. 
The  regular  organization  renominated  their  conservative 
standard-bearer  Taft ;  and  the  bolting  elements,  adopting  the 
name  "Progressive  party"  and  supported  by  sympathizers 
from  outside  the  party,  offered  as  their  candidate  the  veteran 


THE  RIDDLE  OF  THE  PARTIES  281 

progressive,  Roosevelt.  The  Democrats  nominated  Woodrow 
Wilson,  who  described  himself  as  a  "progressive  with  the 
brakes  on."  Since  Taft  ran  a  bad  third,  it  appeared  for  the 
moment  that  the  progressive  spirit  had  completed  its  conquest 
of  the  old  parties.  Four  years  later,  however,  the  old  fer 
ment  was  at  work  again,  with  Wilson  as  the  progressive 
Democratic  candidate  and  Hughes  supported  by  the  conserva 
tive  Republicans.  In  1920  the  voters  were  once  more  pre 
sented  with  the  choice  between  a  conservative  Republican  and 
a  Democrat  of  progressive  antecedents. 

For  the  conscientious  voter  the  situation  has  thus  become 
sadly  complicated,  inasmuch  as  the  progressive  wings  of  the 
opposing  parties  have  more  points  of  similarity  than  the 
opposite  wings  of  the  same  party.  This  baffling  situation 
has  tended  to  wear  down  old-time  party  distinctions  and  has 
made  it  easy  for  a  Roosevelt  Republican  to  become  a  Wilson 
Democrat  or  for  a  Cleveland  Democrat  to  become  a  Taft 
Republican.  The  growth  of  the  independent  vote  has  been 
a  significant  development  of  recent  campaigns.  In  a  more 
important  sense,  this  situation  has  served  to  impair  the 
effectiveness  of  the  old  parties  as  agencies  of  the  popular 
will.  Many  of  the  outstanding  legislative  measures  of  the 
contemporary  era  have  been  the  product  not  of  concerted 
party  action  but  of  temporary  combinations  of  like-thinking 
groups  of  opposite  parties  in  Congress.  Such  laws  as  the 
following  cannot,  with  any  degree  of  accuracy,  be  labeled 
"Republican"  or  "Democratic":  the  federal  income  tax 
amendment,  popular  election  of  senators,  federal  restriction 
of  child  labor,  the  literacy  test  for  immigrants,  conservation 
of  natural  resources,  national  prohibition,  and  the  federal 
grant  of  woman  suffrage.  Although  almost  any  of  these 
measures  might  have  furnished  material  for  clearcut  party 
cleavage,  most  of  them  were  the  product  of  the  progressive 
members  of  the  two  parties  acting  in  conjunction. 


282  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

Is  there,  then,  no  residue  of  principles,  policies  or  sym 
pathies  which  belongs  distinctively  to  the  one  party  rather 
than  to  the  other?  A  further  examination  of  the  record  of 
the  parties  in  recent  years  may  shed  some  light  upon  this 
point.  We  used  to  be  told  that  the  Republicans  stood  for  a 
broadly  national  policy  based  upon  a  liberal  construction  of 
the  Constitution,  whereas  the  Democrats  were  strict  con- 
structionists  desiring  to  enhance  the  power  of  the  states  at 
the  expense  of  the  national  government;  but,  as  has  been 
shown  elsewhere  in  this  volume,  this  distinction  has  broken 
down  in  practice.1 

In  the  absence  of  fundamental  constitutional  differences, 
let  us  turn  to  a  consideration  of  what  are  usually  considered 
as  party  measures.  In  an  effort  to  solve  the  trust  question, 
the  Democrats  enacted  the  Federal  Trade  Commission  Act 
of  1914.  The  basic  principle  of  the  law  had,  however,  been 
urged  upon  Congress  for  adoption  by  President  Roosevelt 
again  and  again,  and  the  Republican  platform  of  1912  had 
pledged  its  adoption  in  case  Taft  should  be  reflected.  This 
difference  between  promise  and  fulfilment  cannot  rightly  be 
laid  to  congenital  party  differences  or  be  taken  as  a  criterion 
of  Republican  bad  faith  and  Democratic  performance;  but, 
rather,  it  represented  a  difference  in  the  relative  prepared 
ness  of  the  public  mind  for  the  accomplishment  of  the 
reform. 

The  organization  of  the  federal  reserve  banking  system  in 
1913  was  another  great  law  passed  by  the  Democrats 
although  the  preliminary  investigations  for  this  measure  had 
been  made  by  a  Republican  commission  during  the  Taft 
administration.  In  the  details  of  the  plan,  a  real  difference 
of  party  principle  emerged,  for  the  Democrats  in  enacting 
the  law  conferred  upon  the  government  direct  control  over 
the  banks  whereas  the  Republicans  had  desired  the  central 
management  to  be  directed  by  the  banks  themselves. 

JSce  pp.  235-242. 


THE  RIDDLE  OF  THE  PARTIES  283 

The  tariff  is  another  question  that  has  stirred  both  parties 
to  legislative  expression  in  recent  years.  The  results  present 
an  interesting  contrast  between  the  theory  and  the  practice  of 
the  Democrats  in  this  matter.  Measured  by  actual  perform 
ance,  the  Democrats  do  not  stand  for  a  tariff  for  revenue 
only  but  merely  for  a  less  degree  of  protection  than  do  their 
opponents.  Both  parties  are  agreed  upon  the  desirability  of 
an  expert  tariff  commission  as  an  aid  in  tariff  legislation. 

In  the  matter  of  labor  legislation,  a  difference  between  the 
parties  is  to  be  found.  The  Democratic  party  has  been 
more  inclined  to  lend  an  ear  to  the  demands  of  the  working- 
men  than  has  been  the  Republican.  Without  going  into 
detail,  the  best  evidence  of  this  is  to  be  found  in  the  fact  that 
since  1908,  when  the  practice  originated,  the  officers  of  the 
American  Federation  of  Labor  have  given  their  endorsement 
to  the  Democratic  national  ticket. 

In  foreign  affairs  the  attitude  of  the  parties  is  more  diffi 
cult  to  define  even  though  questions  of  foreign  relations  have 
bulked  large  in  some  recent  campaigns.  In  1900  the  Repub 
licans  stood  squarely  for  the  acquisition  of  insular  depen 
dencies  in  distant  parts  of  the  globe,  whereas  the  Democrats 
denounced  Republican  ''imperialism"  and  protested  against 
the  United  States  becoming  involved  in  "so-called  world 
politics,  including  the  diplomacy  of  Europe  and  the  intrigue 
and  land  grabbing  of  Asia."  But  by  the  time  of  the  cam 
paign  of  1916  the  Democrats  were  fully  alive  to  the  necessity 
of  "so-called  world  politics,"  in  their  own  meaning  of  the 
term,  and  they  endorsed  President  Wilson's  proposal  of  a 
league  of  natipns.  Four  years  later  they  gave  their  support 
to  the  Covenant  framed  at  the  Paris  Peace  Conference; 
whereas  the  Republicans,  divided  in  opinion  among  those 
who  favored  the  Covenant,  those  who  wanted  a  different 
covenant  and  those  who  wanted  no  league  at  all,  framed  a 
platform  which  contained  crumbs  of  comfort  for  all  three 
groups.  The  fact  is  that  the  league  issue,  which  had  one  of 


284  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

its  strongest  supporters  in  ex-President  Taft,  was  ill  adapted 
to  partisan  uses.  A  careful  review  of  the  diplomatic  prac 
tice  of  the  two  parties  would  show,  I  think,  that,  in  general, 
Republican  foreign  policy  has  been  firmer,  being  more  con 
scious  of  the  needs  of  our  overseas  trade  and  tending  to 
become  aggressive;  whereas  the  international  policy  of  the 
Democrats  has  been  postulated  on  more  idealistic  grounds 
and  has  tended  to  be  less  practical  in  its  results. 

From  such  evidence  as  the  foregoing,  it  is  fair  to  conclude 
that  there  is  today  no  basic  disagreement  between  the  old 
parties  as  to  theory  of  government;  nor  does  either  party 
take  issue  with  the  existing  economic  organization  of  society. 
The  difference  between  the  parties  is  largely  one  of  point  of 
view,  partly  one  of  temperament.  Both  parties  are  oppor 
tunistic  in  their  statesmanship,  waiting  for  issues  to  arise 
and  cry  for  attention  before  formulating  a  definite  policy  for 
dealing  with  them.  But,  as  the  foregoing  examples  suggest, 
the  Republicans  approach  public  problems  with  the  predis 
positions  of  the  successful  financier  and  large  business  man, 
while  the  Democrats  incline  to  consider  public  questions 
from  the  standpoint  of  the  small  business  man  and  of  the 
laboring  man  who  is  on  the  make.  As  a  result  the  Repub 
licans  tend  to  cling  to  the  concrete  benefits  and  positive 
achievements  of  the  past,  whereas  the  Democrats  are  likely 
to  respond  more  quickly  to  demands  for  social  and  economic 
reform  through  changes  in  the  laws. 

VI 

This  discussion  has,  for  the  most  part,  proceeded  on  the 
assumption  that  there  are  only  two  parties  in  American 
politics ;  and  so  far  as  the  vast  majority  of  the  voters  is  con 
cerned,  the  assumption  is  entirely  valid  since,  save  on  two 
occasions,  no  third  party  has  ever  cast  more  than  a  negligible 
percentage  of  the  total  popular  vote.  Nevertheless,  minor 


THE  RIDDLE  OF  THE  PARTIES  285 

parties  cannot  be  ignored  since  some  unforeseen  develop 
ment  might  conceivably  convert  one  of  them  into  a  major 
party,  just  as  back  in  the  fifties  the  Republican  party 
crowded  the  Whig  party  out  of  existence. 

Minor  parties,  in  our  modern  sense,  began  to  make  their 
appearance  with  the  election  of  1872.  They  were  the 
inevitable  accompaniments  of  the  maladjustments  of  society 
occasioned  by  the  great  economic  revolution  following  the 
Civil  War.  The  aggrieved  classes  regarded  the  old  parties 
as  defenders  of  the  new  capitalistic  order,  and  they  saw 
relief  only  in  the  establishment  of  their  own  political  parties. 
The  wage-earners  of  the  cities  were  especially  active  in  such 
movements  although  some  of  the  most  promising  parties 
were  launched  by  the  western  farmers.  In  rapid  succession 
candidates  were  nominated  and  platforms  adopted  by  such 
parties  as  the  Labor  Reformers,  the  Greenbackers,  the 
United  Laborites,  the  Union  Laborites  and  the  Populists; 
their  platforms  demanded  such  reforms  as  fiat  money,  the 
eight-hour  day,  prohibition  of  Chinese  immigration,  govern 
ment  control  of  railroads  and  corporations,  the  taxation  of 
swollen  incomes,  and  "free  silver."  All  these  parties  suf 
fered  for  lack  of  experienced  political  leadership  and  their 
inability  to  secure  the  funds  necessary  to  sustain  a  continuous 
party  organization. 

In  1892  the  ranks  of  the  minor  parties  were  enlarged  by  a 
political  organization  of  a  new  type:  the  Socialist  Labor 
party.  This  party  and  its  subsequent  embodiments  have 
denounced  the  efforts  of  other  minor  parties  to  secure  social 
amelioration  as  mere  palliatives,  and  have  offered  instead  a 
comprehensive  program  for  the  complete  reorganization  of 
society  and  government.  Politically  the  chief  asset  of  the 
Socialists  has  been  the  fact  that  they  have  visualized  for  the 
voter  the  ultimate  goal  toward  which  their  philosophy  tends. 
In  a  practical  sense  they  have  benefited  from  the  fact  that 


286  NEW  VIEWPOINTS  IN  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

they  have  never  been  in  power  in  the  nation,  and  therefore 
their  platform  professions  are  unsullied  by  the  mistakes, 
compromises  and  ineptitudes  of  a  party  that  is  responsible 
for  the  everyday  conduct  of  the  government.  The  Socialist 
vote  exceeded  nine  hundred  thousand  in  1912  and  again  in 
1920  but  has  not  as  yet  won  a  single  electoral  vote.  The 
Prohibition  party  founded  in  1872,  the  Socialist  Labor  party 
established  in  1892,  and  the  American  Socialist  party  organ 
ized  in  1901  have  enjoyed  the  longest  continuous  existence  of 
any  of  the  minor  parties  now  in  politics. 

Despite  the  inferior  vote-getting  power  of  minor  parties, 
they  have  undoubtedly  performed  a  vital  function  in  our 
political  development.  They  have  sometimes  proved  the 
means  by  which  important  new  issues  have  been  forced  upon 
the  reluctant  attention  of  the  old  parties.  This  was  the  case 
in  1896  when  the  Democrats  took  over  the  great  Populist 
issue  of  "free  silver,"  and  again  in  President  Wilson's  first 
administration  when  the  Democrats  undermined  the  strength 
of  the  Progressives  by  enacting  most  of  their  ideas  into  laws. 
Such  pressure,  however,  is  effective  only  when  the  strength 
of  the  third  party  has  reached  threatening  proportions.  In  a 
more  general  way,  minor  parties  have  served  a  useful  educa 
tional  purpose  in  directing  the  attention  of  the  people  to  great 
problems  as  yet  unthought  of  and  accustoming  them  to  the 
consideration  of  novel  ideas  of  public  policy. 

It  is  possible,  however,  that  minor  parties  have  played 
their  most  important  role  as  a  safeguard  to  the  peaceful  and 
orderly  development  of  American  society.  Under  our  sys 
tem  of  government  any  group  of  malcontents  have  the  right 
to  hold  a  convention,  launch  a  new  party  in  a  fever  heat  of 
excitement  and  enthusiasm,  and  give  full  release  to  their  re 
pressed  emotions  in  a  glowing  statement  of  their  grievances. 
Where  there  is  no  occasion  for  secret  conspiracy  and  under 
ground  plotting,  minor  parties  become  the  safety-valve  of 
social  discontent. 


THE  RIDDLE  OF  THE  PARTIES  287 

The  continual  formation  of  new  parties  argues,  on  the 
whole,  a  healthful  condition  of  the  public  mind.  The  eternal 
striving  for  improvement,  the  "divine  discontent"  of  the 
poet,  is  the  source  of  life  m  a  progressive  nation. 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Every  important  party  in  American  history  has  had  one  or  more 
eulogistic  historians;  but  efforts  at  impartial  characterization  and 
description  have  been  comparatively  few.  The  new  school  of  politi 
cal  scientists,  represented  by  such  men  as  James  Bryce,  M.  Ostro- 
gorski,  Charles  A.  Beard,  Henry  Jones  Ford,  Frank  J.  Goodnow,  A. 
Lawrence  Lowell,  Jesse  Macy,  Woodrow  Wilson,  James  A.  Wood- 
burn  and  P.  Orman  Ray,  have  devoted  careful  study  to  the  structure 
and  functions  of  parties.  But  the  historical  significance  of  parties 
has  not  as  yet  received  adequate  treatment  although  illuminating 
brief  discussions  may  occasionally  be  found  in  the  general  histories 
of  the  United  States,  in  historical  monographs  and  in  treatises  on 
American  government.  The  discussion  of  James  Bryce  in  The 
American  Commonwealth  (2  v. ;  New  York,  1888,  and  many  later 
editions),  vol.  ii,  chaps,  liii-lvi,  is  almost  classic;  and  the  summaries 
in  Charles  A.  Beard's  American  Government  and  Politics  (New 
York,  1910,  and  later  editions),  pp.  103-125,  and  Jesse  Macy's 
Political  Parties  in  the  United  States,  1846-1861  (New  York,  1900), 
chap,  iii,  are  of  much  value.  Third  Party  Movements  Since  the  Civil 
War  (Iowa  City,  1916)  by  Fred  E.  Haynes  is  the  only  book  on  that 
subject,  and  it  should  be  supplemented  by  Morris  Hillquit's  History 
of  Socialism  in  the  United  States  (New  York,  1903). 


INDEX 


ADAMS,  ABIGAIL,  lacks  early  edu 
cational  advantages,  130;  on 
rebellion  of  women,  131-132. 

Adams,  Henry,  on  effects  of 
economic  revolution,  250;  as 
author,  102. 

Adams,  John,  as  Harvard  stu 
dent,  73;  on  proportion  of 
colonists  opposed  to  indepen 
dence,  161 ;  explains  term : 
American  Revolution,  161-162; 
on  religious  cause  for  Revo 
lution,  169;  in  First  Continen 
tal  Congress,  36 ;  is  compli 
mented  by  horse-jockey,  178; 
on  influences  behind  Federal 
Convention,  192;  opposes  man 
hood  suffrage,  87;  as  author, 
101. 

Adams,  John  Quincy,  presiden 
tial  levees  of,  88. 

Adams,  Samuel,  as  political  or 
ganizer,  172-173,  176". 

Agricultural  revolution.  See 
Economic  revolution ;  Farm 
ers'  movements. 

Aliens.  See  Immigration;  Na- 
tivism. 

Altschul,  Charles,  as  author,  181. 

Alvord,  Clarence  W.,  as  author, 
70,  183. 

American  Revolution,  defined, 
161-162,  179;  misrepresented 
in  text-books,  160;  geographic 
factors  in,  25,  37;  influence  of 
non-English  frontier  in,  6,  76; 
religious  influences  in,  169- 
170;  divisions  among  colonists, 
161,  180-181 ;  British  back 


ground  of,  162-164;  American 
setting  of,  165-168;  attitude  of 
sections  toward,  168-169,  176- 
177,  178;  Grenville  acts  and 
colonial  opposition,  170-172; 
Townshend  acts  and  colonial 
opposition,  172-173;  troubles 
with  East  India  Company,  173- 
174;  significance  of  Boston 
Tea  Party,  174-175;  acts  of 
1774,  175;  First  Continental 
Congress  and  results,  175-178; 
issue  of  independence,  178-179; 
not  a  contest  over  abstract 
rights,  179;  the  patriot-agita 
tors,  114;  loyalists  of,  76-77, 
180-181 ;  role  of  women  in, 
130-131 ;  bibliographical  note, 
181-183.  See  also  War  for 
Independence. 

Ames,  Herman  V.,  as  author, 
244. 

Andrews,  Charles  M.,  on  Eng 
lish  colonization,  51 ;  as  eco 
nomic  historian,  71 ;  signifi 
cance  in  historiography  of 
colonial  period,  181 ;  as  author, 
181,  182. 

Anthony,  Susan  B.,  wishes  to 
learn  long  division,  135;  agi 
tates  for  immediate  emanci 
pation,  145 ;  wants  no  cessation 
of  suffrage  agitation  during 
Civil  War,  146;  author  of 
nineteenth  amendment,  154;  on 
oligarchy  of  sex,  98;  as  au 
thor,  159. 

Aristocracy,  defined,  72;  signifi 
cance  in  American  history,  72- 


289 


INDEX 


73,  99-100;  in  colonial  life,  73- 
75;  denounced  by  Declaration 
of  Independence  77-78;  status 
in  Confederation  Period,  79- 
80;  as  exemplified  by  Consti 
tution,  80-81 ;  as  Federalist 
ideal,  56;  during  Washington's 
presidency,  82-83;  as  modified 
by  Jeffersonian  Republicans, 
84-86;  as  modified  by  Jackson- 
ian  Democracy,  88-89;  as  af 
fected  by  slavery,  90-91,  92;  as 
affected  by  early  industrialism, 
91-92;  as  affected  by  Civil 
War,  93;  in  period  since  Civil 
War,  94-99 ;  bibliographical 
note,  100-102.  See  also  Democ 
racy;  Jacksonian  Democracy. 
Articles  _of  Confederation,  a 
feeble  instrument,  184-185 ;  as 
a  state  rights  document,  221 ; 
efforts  to  amend,  190-191 ;  vio 
lated  by  adoption  of  Constitu 
tion,  194-195.  See  also  Con 
federation  period. 

BAER,  GEORGE  F.,  on  mission  of 
wealthy  class,  06-97. 

Barnes,  Harry  E.,  on  beginning 
of  modern  times,  245. 

Bassett,  John  S.,  on  North  Caro 
lina  loyalists,  i68n. ;  as  author, 
182,  219. 

Beard,  Charles  A.,  significance 
in  American  historiography, 
71 ;  his  researches  in  eco 
nomics  of  Constitution,  192; 
as  author,  71,  158,  198,  199, 
264,  265,  287. 

Becker,  Carl  L.,  as  author,  182. 

Beecher,  Henry  Ward,  on  men 
ace  of  organized  money,  250. 

Beer,  George  Louis,  as  economic 
historian,  71 ;  as  author,  181- 
182. 

Elaine,  James  G.,  reason  for 
defeat  in  1884,  16-17;  his 
nomination  opposed  by  Roose 
velt,  276;  standing  as  states 
man,  251,  273-274. 


Brigham,  Albert  P.,  as  author, 

45- 

British  commercial  system,  ef 
fect  on  colonies,  53-54. 

Bruce,  H.  Addington,  as  author, 
158. 

Bryan,  William  Jennings,  as 
political  leader,  279;  as  presi 
dential  candidate,  280. 

Bryce,  James,  as  author,  100, 
287. 

Buckle,  Henry  Thomas,  as  au 
thor,  44-45. 


CALHOUN,  ARTHUR  W.,  as  au 
thor,  101,  159,  264. 

Calhoun,  John  C,  as  southern 
statesman,  65;  changes  con 
stitutional  views,  237-238;  as 
author,  101,  228. 

Channing,  Edward,  as  author, 
183. 

Chase,  Salmon  P.,  on  presiden 
tial  levees,  88. 

Civil  War,  geographic  influences 
on,  41-42;  economic  causes  of, 
67-68;  economic  factors  in,  68; 
foreign-born  soldiers  in,  12- 
13;  women  in,  142-145;  effect 
on  southern  aristocracy,  93; 
effect  on  political  radicalism, 
119-120;  effect  on  parties,  271- 
272,  275;  as  close  of  Middle 
Period,  246. 

Clay,  Henry,  as  representative 
of  West,  63,  202;  seeks  to 
unite  Northwest  and  North 
east,  41-42,  64. 

Cleveland,  Frederick  A.,  as  au 
thor,  101. 

Cleveland,  Grover,  as  reformer, 
251 ;  as  violator  of  state 
rights,  240;  as  party  leader, 
277;  on  Democratic  opportu 
nism,  277;  hostile  to  Bryan, 
279,  280. 

Colonial  period,  as  part  of  an 
cient  American  history,  245- 
246;  geographic  influences  af- 


INDEX 


291 


f acting,  24-25,  31-32,  33-37; 
economic  influences  affecting, 
50-54 ;  colonizing  motives  of 
English,  3-4,  51 ;  cosmopolitan 
population,  3,  5-6;  lays  cul 
tural  foundations,  2-3;  selec 
tive  effects  of  colonization, 
109;  aristocratic  character  of 
life  in,  73-75;  position  of 
women  in,  127-131;  literature 
on,  181-182. 

Colonization.  See  Colonial 
period. 

Columbus,  Christopher,  blun 
ders  into  America,  I ;  his  voy 
age  as  international  enterprise, 
2;  geographic  influences  in  his 
voyage,  24,  29-30;  economic 
reasons  for  his  voyage,  49-50. 

Commons,  John  R.,  as  author, 
102,  218-219. 

Confederation  period,  conditions 
during,  79-80,  114,  184-188, 
188-190.  See  also  Articles  of 
Confederation. 

Conservatism,  defined,  103-106; 
as  relative  term,  106-107; 
varying  degrees  of,  107;  allies 
of,  108-109;  as  affected  by 
westward  movement,  109;  as 
affected  by  generations  of 
American  history,  113-122;  of 
rural  population,  255 ;  signifi 
cance  in  American  history, 
122-123;  bibliographical  note, 
124-125.  See  also  Generations 
of  American  history ;  Radical 
ism. 

Constitution,  motives  animating 
movement  for,  188-189;  eco 
nomic  influences  in  adoption 
of,  54,  189-198;  attitude  of 
convention  toward  democracy, 
80-81 ;  analysis  of,  81,  193- 
194;  campaign  to  ratify,  194- 
198;  Hamilton's  opinion  of, 
26;  viewed  as  experiment,  81- 
82;  and  state  rights,  221-222; 
bibliographical  note  on  eco 
nomic  aspects  of,  198-199. 


Cubberley,  Ellwood  P.,  on  con 
trast  between  Lincoln's  time 
and  present,  247-248;  as  au 
thor,  219,  264,  265. 


DECLARATION  OF  INDEPENDENCE, 
as  charter  of  democracy,  77; 
quoted,  77-78;  application  to 
American  conditions^  78,  131 ; 
produced  by  new  generation, 
114;  contemporary  reception 
of,  178;  as  viewed  by  south 
erners,  91. 

Democracy  (political),  as  theme 
of  American  history,  72;  in 
colonial  period,  74;  as  ex 
pressed  in  Declaration  of  In 
dependence,  77-78 ;  criticised 
in  Federal  Convention,  80-81 ; 
aided  by  immigrants  during 
Federalist  regime,  7-8;  de 
nounced  by  Federalists,  84;  as 
Republican  ideal,  57;  during 
Jeffersonian  regime,  84-86; 
affected  by  frontier,  34,  39,  41, 
43,  53,  75-76;  movement  for 
manhood  suffrage,  86-87,  216; 
opposed  by  Kent  and  others, 
87 ;  bestowed  on  male  negroes, 
93 ;  agitation  for  since  1900, 
97;  acquired  by  women,  98; 
as  test  of  radicalism,  105-106; 
literature  on,  101.  See  also 
Aristocracy ;  Jacksonian  De 
mocracy. 

Democratic  party,  origin  of,  274 ; 
economic  basis  of,  57-58;  his 
tory  of,  274-281 ;  principles 
under  Jackson,  117,  274;  de 
fection  of  Calhounites,  66; 
dominated  by  southern  lead 
ers,  66-68,  238,  274-275;  con 
stitutional  doctrines  of,  238- 
'  242 ;  effect  of  Civil  War  on, 
275-277;  and  Solid  South,  276; 
under  Cleveland's  leadership, 
277;  contrasted  with  present- 
day  Republican  party,  269,  281- 
284. 


292 


INDEX 


Diplomacy  of  the  United  States. 
See  Foreign  relations;  Mon 
roe  Doctrine. 

Discovery  of  America,  signifi 
cance  of,  i ;  geographic  influ 
ences  affecting,  24,  29-30;  eco 
nomic  influences  affecting,  49- 
50;  as  beginning  of  modern 
history,  245. 

Douglas,  Stephen  A.,  on  Repub 
lican  party,  68;  on  Dred  Scott 
decision,  239. 

Dunning,  William  A.,  on  Ban 
croft  as  historian,  211;  as  au 
thor,  265. 

ECONOMIC  INFLUENCES  IN  AMERI 
CAN  HISTORY,  contrasted  with 
geographic  influences,  49;  in 
discovery  and  exploration,  49- 
50;  in  colonization,  3-4,  5I- 
52 ;  in  promoting  colonial  an 
tagonisms,  52-53;  in  British 
imperial  policy,  ^  53-54  >  m 
American  Revolution,  54,  165- 
168;  in  movement  for  Consti 
tution,  54,  189-198;  in  diplo 
macy,  54-55,  56,  67;  in  early 
party  development,  55-58;  in 
politics  of  Middle  Period,  58- 
68;  in  Civil  War,  68;  since 
Civil  War,  69;  bibliographical 
note,  69-71,  182,  198-199.  See 
also  Economic  interpretation 
of  history;  Economic  revolu 
tion  in  United  States. 

Economic  interpretation  of  his 
tory,  defined,  47 ;  relation  to 
Socialism,  47-48;  as  phrased 
by  Madison,  48-49;  contrasted 
with  geographic  interpretation, 
49;  applied  to  American  his 
tory  in  Marxian  sense,  70-71 ; 
phrase  not  in  Cyclopedia,  71 ; 
admitted  limitations  of,  71 ; 
product  of  an  industrial  age, 
263.  See  also  Economic  in 
fluences  in  American  history. 

Economic  revolution  in  United 
States,  significance  of,  246- 


248,  248-249;  causes  of,  248; 
three  aspects  of,  249;  effect 
on  Henry  Adams,  250;  effect 
on  political  leadership,  250- 
252;  effect  on  parties,  272-273; 
transportation  aspect  of,  252- 
254;  agricultural  aspect  of, 
254-255  J  industrial  aspect  of, 
255-259;  effect  on  American 
diplomacy,  259-260;  influence 
on  American  life  and  culture, 
261-262;  effect  on  political 
philosophy,  262-263 ;  biblio 
graphical  note,  264-265. 

Education  in  United  States,  rise 
of  Catholic  schools,  10;  Ger 
man  influence  on,  20;  in  colo 
nial  period,  74-75;  beginnings 
of  free  public,  86;  movement 
for  free  public,  89-90,  205,  208, 
209-210;  for  women,  130,  135, 
140,  141,  149-150;  establish 
ment  of  colleges  in  Jacksonian 
period,  214;  present  objectives 
of  education,  261-262. 

Eliot,  Charles  W.,  on  colonial 
women,  127. 

Emerson,  Ralph  Waldo,  as  femi 
nist,  140;  as  exponent  of 
Transcendentalism,  212;  on 
craze  for  communities,  214;  as 
author,  125,  210,  219. 

Exploration,  geographic  condi 
tions  of,  30-31 ;  economic  in 
fluences  affecting,  50-51. 


FAIRCHILD,  HENRY  P.,  as  author, 
21,  22. 

Farmers'  movements,  geographic 
basis  of,  43 ;  economic  basis 
of,  254;  opposed  to  plutocracy, 
96;  Granger  movement,  253- 
254 ;  Greenback  movement, 
255;  Populism,  255.  See  also 
Economic  revolution  in  United 
States. 

Farrand,  Max,  on  immigration, 
19;  on  nature  of  Constitution, 
193;  as  author,  21. 


INDEX 


293 


Federalist  party,  economic  basis 
of,  55-56;  constitutional  views 
of,  235-237;  seeks  to  confer 
title  on  president,  82-83;  op 
poses  aliens,  7-8;  reasons  for 
unpopularity  of,  83 ;  alarmed 
by  Republican  success,  84. 

Fisher,  Sydney  G.,  on  attempts 
to  misrepresent  Revolution, 
161 ;  as  author,  159,  181,  183. 

Foreign  relations  of  United 
States,  geographic  influences 
in,  25-28,  40-41 ;  economic  in 
fluences  on,  54-55,  56,  67;  ef 
fect  of  economic  revolution 
on,  259-260;  attitude  of  major 
parties  toward,  283-284.  See 
also  Monroe  Doctrine. 

Foster,  John  W.,  on  American 
foreign  policy,  27-28. 

Fox,  Dixon  Ryan,  as  author,  46, 
101. 

Franklin,  Benjamin,  opposes 
German  immigration,  5. 

Freeman,  Edward  A.,  on  use 
of  word  "federal,"  234;  as  au 
thor,  100. 

Frontier  in  American  history, 
significance  of,  2,  34,  37,  109; 
colonial  frontiers,  33-34,  52- 
53;  during  American  Revolu 
tion,  25-26,  37,  167-168,  176; 
during  Confederation  period, 
185;  attitude  toward  ratifica 
tion  of  Constitution,  195-196; 
in  the  Middle  West,  8-9,  38- 
42,  58-60,  201-203;  in  the 
trans-Mississippi  West,  42-44; 
role  of  women  pioneers,  132- 
133;  disappearance  of,  42,  43- 
44,  253;  literature  on,  45. 

GALLOWAY,  JOSEPH,  on  sectarian 
influences  in  Revolution,  170; 
from  patriot  to  Tory,  180;  on 
racial  make-up  of  patriot 
army,  7. 

Generations  of  American  his 
tory,  Jefferson  on,  113;  signifi 
cance  of,  122-124;  first  gen 


eration,  114-115;  second  gen 
eration,  115-116;  third  genera 
tion,  116-117;  fourth  genera 
tion,  117;  fifth  generation,  117- 
120;  sixth  generation,  120- 
121 ;  seventh  generation,  121- 
122 ;  beginning  of  eighth  gen 
eration,  122. 

Geographic  influences  in  Ameri 
can  history,  defined,  23,  49; 
two  main  aspects,  23;  in  dis 
covery  and  exploration,  24,  29- 
31 ;  in  colonial  period,  24-25, 
31-32,  33-37;  in  French  and 
Indian  War,  32-33;  in  revo 
lutionary  era,  25-26,  37,  165- 
168;  in  ratification  of  Consti 
tution,  195-196;  in  foreign  re 
lations,  26-29;  passing  of  iso 
lation,  28-29;  in  development 
of  Middle  West,  38-41;  as 
cause  of  sectional  antagonism, 
41-42;  since  Civil  War,  42-44; 
bibliographical  note,  44-46. 


HAMILTON,  ALEXANDER,  an  im 
migrant,  8;  writes  resolution 
calling  Federal  Convention, 
191 ;  on  opposition  to  ratifica 
tion,  197;  opinion  of  Consti 
tution,  26,  81 ;  on  best  form 
of  government,  80;  finan 
cial  plan  of,  55-56;  approves 
of  child  labor  in  factories, 
134;  reason  for  fighting  duel, 
84. 

Harper,  William,  on  Declaration 
of  Independence,  91 ;  on  slav 
ery,  92-93. 

Harriman,  E.  H.,  on  modern 
pioneer  spirit,  96. 

Hart,  Albert  Bushnell,  as  au 
thor,  71,  102,  125,  219. 

Henderson,  Archibald,  as  author, 
70. 

Hockett,  Homer  C.,  as  author, 
70,  199. 

Hoover,  Herbert,  as  presidential 
possibility  in  1920,  268. 


294 


INDEX 


Hulbert,  Archer  B.,  as  author, 
45,  4.6. 

Hutchinson,  Anne,  mother  of 
fifteen  children,  128;  banished 
and  murdered,  128-129. 

Hutchinson,  Thomas,  on  Stamp 
Act  riot,  75;  and  tea  troubles, 
174;  on  Samuel  Adams,  173- 
174;  on  proportion  of  colo 
nists  favoring  independence, 
161 ;  as  loyalist,  76. 

IMMIGRATION,  significance  in 
American  history,  2;  racial 
make-up  of  Columbus's  crew, 
2;  mixed  character  of  English 
colonists,  3;  reasons  for  colo 
nial  immigration,  3-4;  propor 
tion  of  foreign-born  in  colo 
nies,  5 ;  influence  and  numbers 
of  English,  Scotch  Irish  and 
Germans  in  colonies,  5-6,  36- 
37;  non-English  groups  and 
American  Revolution,  6-7,  76, 
167,  169;  democratizing  influ 
ence  during  Federalist  regime, 
7-8;  rapid  increase  from  1820 
to  1860,  8;  influence  of  Ger 
man  immigrants  from  1830  to 
1860,  8-9;  influence  of  Irish 
from  1830  to  1860,  9-10;  entry 
of  political  corruption,  10 ; 
Know  Nothing  movement,  10- 
ii ;  avoids  South,  11-12;  as 
influence  for  Union  and 
against  slavery,  12;  immi 
grants  in  Union  army,  12-13; 
enters  new  phase  after  Civil 
War,  13-14;  Oriental  immigra 
tion,  13-14;  characteristics  and 
influence  of  new  immigration 
from  Europe,  14-18,  260;  re 
strictive  legislation,  18-19; 
racial  contributions  to  Ameri 
can  culture  and  ideals,  19-20; 
as  reason  for  world  leadership 
of  United  States,  20-21 ; 
Americanized  by  frontier,  44; 
bibliographical  note,  21-22, 
See  also  Nativism. 


Industrial  revolution.  See 
Economic  revolution  in  United 
States ;  Manufacturing. 

Isolation.  See  Foreign  relations 
of  United  States;  Geographic 
influences  in  American  his 
tory. 


JACKSON,  ANDREW,  as  repre 
sentative  of  West,  63,  202; 
causes  of  election  to  presi 
dency,  65,  88,  209;  as  product 
of  new  democratic  spirit,  200- 
201,  218;  as  party  leader,  274; 
achievements  and  ideals  of  his 
administration,  65-66,  217-218; 
one  of  greatest  presidents,  124. 
See  also  Jacksonian  Democ 
racy. 

Jacksonian  Democracy,  defined, 
200-201 ;  western  influences  in, 
201-203;  relation  of  labor 
movement  to,  203-210;  intel 
lectual  and  religious  influences 
in,  210-215 ;  political  phases  of, 
117,  216-218;  bibliographical 
note,  218-219. 

Jefferson,  Thomas,  on  debts  of 
planters,  166-167;  on  democ 
racy,  100;  on  division  of  man 
kind  into  schools  of  opinion, 
104;  on  merits  of  optimism, 
106;  on  short-time  legislation, 
113;  on  political  situation  in 
1790,  81-82;  political  bargain 
with  Hamilton,  56;  organizes 
Republican  party,  83,  274; 
writes  Kentucky  Resolutions, 
223;  constitutional  views  of, 
235-236;  principles  of  his  ad 
ministration,  84-86;  on  pur 
chase  of  Louisiana,  236. 

Johnston,  Alexander,  on  state 
sovereignty,  222;  as  author, 
243,  244. 


KENT,  JAMES,  on  manhood  suf 
frage,  87. 


INDEX 


295 


LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  UNITED 
STATES,  before  Civil  War,  86, 
133-134,  206-210;  after  Civil 
War,  257-259;  opposed  to  plu 
tocracy,  96;  as  menace  to  privi 
lege,  97-98;  as  affected  by  im 
migration,  14-15,  18;  in  poli 
tics,  283,  285-286;  entry  of 
women  into  factories,  133,  148- 
149. 

Literature,  American,  during 
Jacksonian  period,  210-211;  at 
the  present  time,  262;  cause 
for  popularity  of  short  story, 
261. 

Lecky,  William  E.  H.,  as  author, 
183. 

Libby,  Orin  G.,  as  author,  46, 
199. 

Lincoln,  Abraham,  favors 
woman  suffrage,  140;  attacks 
Supreme  Court,  271 ;  effect  of 
election  on  South,  93,  271 ; 
praises  war  work  of  women, 
144;  one  of  greatest  presidents, 
124;  contrast  between  his  time 
and  today,  247-248. 

Lodge,  Henry  Cabot,  on  Hamil 
ton's  financial  plan,  56;  on 
reason  for  Hamilton's  duel,  84. 

Lowell,  James  Russell,  on 
Protestantism,  212 ;  on  unrest 
of  Jacksonian  period,  214-215 ; 
as  author,  210. 

Lybyer,  A.  H.,  on  discovery  of 
America,  49-50. 

MCLAUGHLIN,  ANDREW  C,  as 
author,  71,  101,  125,  199. 

McMaster,  John  Bach,  signifi 
cance  of  writings  of,  69;  as 
author,  21-22,  101,  102,  199. 

Madison,  James,  on  economic 
group  conflicts,  48-49,  69; 
writes  Virginia  resolutions, 
223 ;  organizes  Republican 
party,  83;  opposes  extension 
of  suffrage,  87. 

Manufacturing,  development  prior 
to  Civil  War,  60,  203-204,  247; 


development  after  Civil  War, 
255-259;  women  workers  in, 
133,  148-149.  See  also  Eco 
nomic  revolution  in  United 
States. 

Marshall,  John,  marries  sixteen- 
year-old  girl,  128;  on  motives 
for  ratification  of  Constitu 
tion,  197;  opposes  extension 
of  suffrage,  87 ;  as  author,  199. 

Martineau,  Harriet,  on  social 
distinctions  in  America,  92; 
as  author,  100. 

Mencken,  H.  L.,  on  racial  in 
fluences  in  American  culture, 
19,  20;  on  drama  of  American 
life,  261. 

Merriam,  Charles  Edward,  as 
author,  101,  219,  243,  265. 

Modern  times  in  United  States, 
defined,  246.  See  also  Recent 
history  of  United  States. 

Monroe  Doctrine,  geographic 
causes  of,  27;  effect  of  eco 
nomic  revolution  on  develop 
ment  of,  260. 

Morris,  Gouverneur,  on  the 
mob,  76;  on  popular  govern 
ment,  80. 

Moses,  Bernard,  as  author,  101. 

Music  in  United  States,  develop 
ment  since  Civil  War,  263. 

NATIVISM,  in  colonial  times,  5; 
as  expressed  by  Federalists,  7 ; 
Know  Nothing  movement,  10- 
ii ;  since  Civil  War,  18-19. 
See  also  Immigration. 

Nullification,  doctrine  of,  rela 
tion  to  state  rights  theory, 
220;  announced  by  Kentucky, 
223;  by  South  Carolina,  228- 
229;  rejected  by  other  south 
ern  states,  229-230;  superseded 
by  secession,  232.  See  also 
Secession,  doctrine  of;  State 
rights  theory. 

OGG,  FREDERIC  AUSTIN,  on  Mon 
roe  Doctrine,  260;  as  author, 
265. 


INDEX 


Orth,  Samuel  P.,  as  author,  21. 
Osgood,  Herbert  L.,  significance 

in    historiography    of    colonial 

period,  181. 

PAXSON,  FREDERIC  L.,  as  author, 

70,  265. 
Payne,  Edward  John,  as  author, 

45- 

Penn,  William,  as  promoter  of 
immigration,  4. 

Plutocracy,  defined,  94-95 ;  agi 
tation  against,  96-98;  Taft  on, 
278. 

Political  parties  in  United  States, 
their  meaning  not  clear  to 
voters,  266-268;  ways  of  test 
ing,  268-270;  function  of  plat 
forms,  268 ;  their  nature  prior 
to  1896,  277-278;  their  nature 
since  1896,  278-281 ;  analysis 
of  principles  of,  282-284; 
minor  parties,  285-287;  biblio 
graphical  note,  287.  See  also 
Democratic  party ;  Federalist 
party ;  Republican  party,  first ; 
Republican  party,  second ;  So 
cialism  ;  Whig  party. 

Populism,  255,  278-279. 

RADICALISM,  defined,  103-106;  as 
relative  term,  106-107;  vary 
ing  degrees  of,  107 ;  as  viewed 
in  retrospect,  108;  allies  of, 
108-109;  reasons  for  spread 
in  America,  109;  accelerated 
by  immigration,  17-18,  109; 
moderated  by  easy  land  owner 
ship,  109-110;  as  affected  by 
generations  of  American  his 
tory,  113-122;  of  rural  popu 
lation,  255;  significance  in 
American  history,  122-123 ; 
bibliographical  note,  124-125. 
See  also  Conservatism ;  Gen 
erations  of  American  history; 
Reform. 

Railroads,  built  by  Irish,  9;  geo 
graphic  influence  of,  42;  rapid 
growth  after  Civil  War,  252- 


253 ;  government  regulation  of, 
253-254;  See  also  Economic 
revolution  in  United  States. 

Ramsdell,  Joseph  E.,  on  central 
izing  trend  of  government, 
234-235;  on  Federal  Reserve 
Act  and  Adamson  Law,  241- 
242. 

Randolph,  John,  opposes  exten 
sion  of  suffrage,  87;  on  Whig 
principles,  269-270. 

Recent  American  history,  be 
ginning  of,  246 ;  significance  of 
economic  revolution  in,  246- 
250;  development  of  trans 
portation  and  its  influence  on, 
252-254 ;  agricultural  growth 
and  its  influence  on,  254-255; 
industrial  expansion  and  its 
influence  on,  259-260;  geo 
graphic  influences  in,  42-44; 
economic  influences  in,  69; 
immigration  in,  13-21 ;  politi 
cal  leadership  in,  120-122, 
250-251 ;  party  development  in, 
239-242,  272-274,  275-287 ; 
diplomatic  interests  of,  259- 
260;  nationalizing  tendencies 
in,  234-235;  activities  of 
women  in,  148-158;  demo 
cratic  and  aristocratic  aspects 
of,  93-100;  life  and  manners 
in,  261-263.  See  also  Eco 
nomic  revolution  in  United 
States. 

Reform,  three  stages  of,  no- 
112;  examples  of,  in  Ameri 
can  history,  112-113,  213; 
supported  by  women,  151-152; 
spirit  as  analyzed  by  Lowell, 
215;  modern  political  expo 
nents  of,  250-251. 

Religious  influences  in  Ameri 
can  history,  in  colonization,  3; 
in  colonial  life,  75;  in  Ameri 
can  Revolution,  167,  169-170; 
separation  of  church  and  state, 
83;  as  factor  in  Jacksonian 
Democracy,  211-213;  as  factor 
in  Know  Nothing  movement, 


INDEX 


297 


io ;  in  Republican  party,  271; 
in  campaign  of  1884,  17;  as 
modified  by  economic  revolu 
tion,  263. 

Republican  party,  first,  economic 
basis  of,  56-57;  opposed  to 
aristocracy,  83,  274;  attitude 
toward  democracy,  84-85 ;  con 
duct  in  office,  115-116;  consti 
tutional  doctrines  of,  235-236; 
forerunner  of  Democratic 
party,  274.  See  also  Demo 
cratic  party. 

Republican  party,  second,  origin 
of  in  1854,  68,  119,  142,  270; 
economic  basis  of,  57;  consti 
tutional  views  of,  240-242;  his 
tory  of,  270-274,  277-281 ; 
character  of,  before  1865,  270- 
272;  conservative  reaction  of, 
272-274;  contrasted  with  pres 
ent-day  Democratic  party, 
269,  281-284. 

Rhodes,  James  Ford,  on  per 
sonal  liberty  laws,  231. 

Roosevelt,  Theodore,  on  reform 
movements,  iio-m;  opposes 
Elaine's  nomination,  276;  as 
progressive  leader,  279-280;  as 
leader  in  conservation  move 
ment,  253;  an  aggressive  na 
tionalist,  241 ;  one  of  greatest 
presidents,  124. 


SANTA YANA,  GEORGE,  on  charac 
teristics  of  modern  American, 
261. 

Schlesinger,  Arthur  Meier,  as 
author,  182,  265. 

Schools.  See  Education  in 
United  States. 

Secession,  doctrine  of,  relation 
to  state  rights  theory,  220; 
New  England  plot  of  1804, 
237 ;  and  Hartford  Conven 
tion,  225 ;  as  shield  against 
federal  interference,  230;  as 
successor  to  nullification,  232; 
as  expressed  by  South  Caro 


lina,  232,  233,  234;  by  Georgia, 
233,  234;  put  into  execution, 
233,  275;  repudiated  by  John 
son  governments,  233-234;  re 
pudiated  by  Democratic  party, 
239.  See  also  Nullification, 
doctrine  of ;  State  rights 
theory. 

Sectionalism,  in  revolutionary 
period,  165-169;  in  Middle 
Period,  58-68.  See  also  Slav 
ery. 

Semple,  Ellen  Churchill,  as  au 
thor,  45,  46. 

Shaler,  Nathaniel  S.,  as  author, 

.45- 

Silver  controversy,  as  political 
issue,  278-279,  286.  See  also 
Populism. 

Slavery,  geographic  basis  of,  41 ; 
economic  basis  of,  61-62;  in 
colonial  period,  78;  keeps  im 
migration  from  South,  n; 
significance  of  westward 
spread  of,  66;  as  political 
issue,  66-68,  118-119,  270-271, 
274-275;  as  basis  of  white 
aristocracy,  90-91,  92;  agita 
tion  against,  118-119,  136-137, 
141-142,  145-146,  213;  abolition 
of,  93,  119;  treatment  of  f reed- 
men,  99,  119-120. 

Socialism,  and  economic  deter 
minism,  47-48,  70-71 ;  first 
organized  by  Germans,  17-18; 
communistic  experiments,  214; 
gains  recruits  among  women, 
149;  in  politics,  264,  285-286; 
as  goal  of  Democratic  party, 
269. 

Squire,  Belle,  as  author,  158. 

Stanton,  Elizabeth  Cady,  as  au 
thor,  158,  159. 

State  rights  theory,  term  of  vari 
able  meaning,  220;  relation  to 
strict  construction,  220-221 ; 
essence  of,  221 ;  place  in 
American  history,  222-223,  235, 
243;  as  expressed  in  Consti 
tution,  221-222;  as  viewed  by 


298 


INDEX 


Virginia,  223-224,  226,  228, 
229;  by  Kentucky,  223-224, 
230,  232,  233 ;  by  Massachusetts, 
224,  226,  227,  230-231 ;  by 
Connecticut,  224,  225,  227,  231 ; 
by  Pennsylvania,  226,  227, 
229;  by  Ohio,  226,  229,  231, 
232;  by  South  Carolina,  226, 
228-229,  232,  233,  234;  by 
Georgia,  227,  228,  229,  233, 
234;  by  Alabama,  228,  229; 
by  Mississippi,  228,  229,  233; 
by  North  Carolina,  229;  by 
Vermont,  231 ;  by  New  Jersey, 
231 ;  by  Wisconsin,  231 ;  by 
Maine,  232 ;  by  Maryland,  232 ; 
by  Delaware,  232;  by  Ten 
nessee,  233;  Hartford  Con 
vention  as  expression  of,  225; 
since  Civil  War,  234-235,  239- 
242;  as  practised  by  Jeffer- 
sonian  Republicans,  235-236, 
237-238;  by  Federalists,  236- 
237;  by  Democrats,  238- 
242 ;  by  Republicans,  240-242 ; 
bibliographical  note,  243- 
244.  See  also  Nullification, 
doctrine  of ;  Secession,  doc 
trine  of. 

Strong,  Josiah,  on  modern  aris 
tocracy,  94. 

Suffrage.  See  Democracy  (po 
litical)  ;  Slavery;  Women. 

Sumner,  Helen,  on  Working 
Men's  party,  210. 

TAFT,  WILLIAM  H.,  on  plutoc 
racy,  278;  as  presidential  can 
didate,  280. 

Thorpe,  Francis  Newton,  as  au 
thor,  ipi. 

Tocqueyille,  Alexis  de,  on 
American  aristocracy,  88;  as 
author,  100. 

Turner,  Frederick  J.,  signifi 
cance  in  American  historiog 
raphy,  45,  69-70;  influence  on 
historical  scholarship,  70 ;  pre 
sides  over  conference,  46;  as 
author,  45,  70,  101,  218. 


UNITED  STATES  SANITARY  COM 
MISSION,  142-143. 

VAN  BUREN,  MARTIN,  as  repre 
sentative  of  northern  seaboard, 
64;  establishes  ten-hour  day, 
209;  as  candidate  in  1840,  89. 

Van  Tyne,  Claude  H.,  on  selec 
tive  effects  of  colonization, 
109;  as  author,  182,  183. 

WAR  OF  1812,  geographic  in 
fluences  in,  26,  39;  attitude  of 
New  England  toward,  224-225. 

War  for  Independence,  not  the 
American  Revolution,  161-162; 
geographic  conditions  of  war 
fare,  25-26;  a  victory  for  state 
rights,  221 ;  role  of  women  in, 
132. 

Warne,  Frank  J.,  as  author,  21. 

Washington,  George,  in  non-im 
portation  movement,  172;  pre 
vents  army  plot  at  Newburg, 
185 ;  on  danger  of  lawlessness, 
188;  approves  child  labor  in 
factories,  134;  geographic  fac 
tor  in  Farewell  Address,  26, 
29;  one  of  greatest  presidents, 
124. 

Watterson,  Henry,  on  Demo 
cratic  party,  275. 

Webster,  Daniel,  constitutional 
views  of,  237-238;  opposes 
manhood  suffrage,  87;  eulo 
gizes  log-cabin,  89. 

Wdls,  David  A.,  as  author,  264. 

West  in  American  history.  See 
Frontier  in  American  history. 

West,  Willis  Mason,  as  author, 
218. 

Whig  party,  economic  basis  of, 
57- 

Wilson,  Woodrow,  on  cause  for 
ratification  of  Constitution, 
197;  as  presidential  candidate, 
281 ;  urges  federal  suffrage 
amendment,  155;  as  national 
ist,  241-242;  on  democratiza- 


INDEX 


299 


tion  of  industry,  98;  on  New 
York  as  Italian  city,  15;  one 
of  greatest  presidents,  124;  as 
author,  70,  287. 

Women,  ignored  by  history  text 
books,  126;  part  in  coloniza 
tion,  127;  status  in  colonies, 
128-130;  in  revolutionary  agi 
tation,  130-131 ;  in  War  for 
Independence,  131-132;  as 
western  pioneers,  132-133;  en 
try  into  factories,  133,  148- 
149;  education  of,  130,  135, 
140,  141,  140-150;  first  woman 
rights  movement,  135-140, 
213;  Seneca  Falls  convention 
of  1848,  138-139;  in  anti- 
slavery  movement,  136-137, 
141-142,  145-146;  legal  status 


of,  129-130,  140,  152-153;  in 
anti-liquor  movement,  141, 
151-152;  in  Civil  War,  14.2- 
145;  struggle  for  universal 
suffrage,  97,  130,  138-139,  146- 
148,  153-155;  club  movement, 
150-151;  in  social  welfare 
movement,  152;  in  World 
War,  156-157;  outlook  for, 
157-158;  bibliographical  note, 
158-159. 

World  War,  effect  of  immigra 
tion  on  American  attitude  to 
ward,  19-20;  geographic  con 
siderations  in  American  atti 
tude  toward,  28-29;  part  of 
women  in,  156-157;  causes 
great  centralization  of  federal 
authority,  242. 


ETURN       CIRCULATION  DEPARTMENT 
O  ""i^       202  Ma  i  n  L  i  bra  ry                        642-3403 

DAN  PERIOD  1 
HOME  USE 

2 

3 

5 

6 

ALL  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  AFTER  7  DAYS 

1 -month  loans  may  be  renewed  by  calling  642-3405 

month  loans  may  be  recharged  by  bringing  books  to  Circulation  DC 

Renewals  and  recharges  may  be  made  4  days  prior  to  due  date 

DUE   AS  STAMPED  BELOW 


rQEClQme 

^r^w** 

•  JUL  2  o  1983     J 

JN  U  »  20HJ 

mo  i  1O77     *  4 

CIRCULATION  DEFT. 

23  iy// 
\«.J    r/\  /</T? 

s/ 

OCT301988 

BRfffi.WRZ?^ 

Wj|E  FEB  171388 

JUN  2  9  197* 

SEP  26  198U 

fiEi  B  K 

||AP      ; 

.j  v9!j®Di3C.SEPi2'88 

tc-  CIR.  MAR  1  2   1979 

J-S'    / 

MAY  14  1980  ^ 

A  rlQ  Mflfl  7    *^ 

[535 

Pltjt«v.i»^' 
jfTO    SE?11 

gti  1       ' 

DRM  NO   DD  6,  40m,  6'76  UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA,  BERKELI 

BERKELEY,  CA  94720 


\ 


View) 


